Donate an IPod to Your Senator

[bkdelong]

I was reading a few days back about a hearing on the Broadcast and Audio Flags in the Senate. Some very interesting insight from a pro-DRM Senator who referenced his daughter buying him an iPod and asking questions about what he could access. If all it took was one of them getting an iPod to connect with the common citizen on DRM issues, then IPac's campaign to donate iPods to Senators is something I can get behind.

Of course, I'd like to see them take it a step further and research the Senators' music tastes, and pre-fill the iPod. Maybe include some relevant political fodder as well.

Comments

the ipods are pre-filled

[(Anonymous)]

Check the link: "Plus, we're going to pre-load each one with examples of the cultural richness made possible by sharing and collaboration - public domain content, Creative Commons content, and audio messages about the importance of balanced copyright policy."

Re: the ipods are pre-filled

[bkdelong.livejournal.com]

Gods forbid I pay attention. :) Sorry, tired person over here.

[floppsy.livejournal.com]

Finally asked M for his opinion on DRM ... & it seems his issues with it (yes, even he has some) is the lack of ubiquity between standards. He also said the lack of a general industry standard &/or ability to do a simple standard-to-standard handshake (data share), causes piracy ... due to inability for seemless use of legal P2P networks.

I guess, the issue becomes who sets the standards (remember everyone's invested heavily in their own tech from R&D to the factories). Apple & Windows have problems seeing eye-2-eye & the last thing anyone wants or needs is the gov (any gov) stepping in to mandate a standard.

Dunno what the answer is, but you asked me to ask M & I did.

BTW, what's the "common citizen's" issues with DRM? I honestly have no clue here ... dunno what it is they want, or are looking to change ...

[bkdelong.livejournal.com]

I honestly can't answer that. I was just thinking the other day at how incredibly overpaid many of our entertainers are these days, (Sports and Arts), and would frankly like to see the industry change.

But I'd also like to see artists retain more control over their art instead of it going to middlemen, companies, and organizations like the RIAA and MPAA. I think there is a massive schizm between what most artists get verses what the labels/production companies get.

As a consumer, I want to purchase a movie or album or individual song and I want to be able to own that copy. I'd like to be able to legally make backup copies, share the movie with my friends, copy it to any friggen device I want to listen to it on. If I feel so inclined, I'd like to be able to share the actual product with my friends through broadcasting - ie Internet Radio. They won't necessarily get the file but they can listen to it.

I'd like to see a truly, honest study/questionnaire/poll on both sides that looks at how many people blatantly "steal" movies and music, just how much they take for free and how many get some for free causing them to purchase it in the long run.

*ramble*, *ramble*

sorry so long ...

[floppsy.livejournal.com]

" I was just thinking the other day at how incredibly overpaid many of our entertainers are these days, (Sports and Arts), and would frankly like to see the industry change."

heeeey lets not cut into my bottom line here, remember I errr M gets 3% of that. And, actually, the entertainers see very little of that cash - take 10 mil. 3% to agents, 3-5% to managers, 30% (off the top, do not see, do not pass go) directly to taxes, then they have all these other expenses like drivers, hairdressers, assistants, shoppers, make up artists & the rest of their posses who collectively scoop about 30-40% of it. And I'm sure there are a few other expenses I'm forgetting. By the end you're talking maybe 1-2m hitting their pocket & they're supporting an entire eco-system that's qualified to either do what their doing or be on welfare. And besides, they work very, very hard ... can you *imagine* the stress of deciding between Versace or Dolce & Gabbana gowns before an event? The horror, I tell you ... the HORROR ::G::

As for the RIAA they don't have ANY control over an artists work (no matter what artists may want to fob onto them to remove their dirty fingerprints from any type of lockdown when confronted by fans) ... the label & the artists management (who represent what the artist wants) DO have control. The RIAA simply represents the labels themselves. Which, actually means, if the artists who are signed to labels wanted things changed they could organize & change it. Many artists create their own labels & go into distro-only deals with labels (& then they generally implement DRM on their own too), but the majority are more then happy with what they've set up. What most artists ARE PO'd about is the royalty system (BMI, ASCAP & the other 1) that seem to constantly be behind in payments & have auditing problems --as in, until the artist calls for an audit the problem of payment is not resolved. Maybe indy, unsigned people feel the RIAA is crushing the industry ... but from everything I've seen, throw them a contract with a major & they get a fast case of STFU re DRM & are sometimes the most vocal about lockdowns of material.

As a consumer, if I bought any of that stuff I'd be totally apoplectic if I didn't *own* (or at least have unlimited rights to use in whatever way I saw fit) what I purchased -- though it does sound like the Brit system of purchasing a home, where in many cases you've just bought a lease on the land for 99 years, not the actual land itself, which seems odd, but back to entertainment -- & find as many ways around it as possible. I'd be a netflix junkie & using P2P music & video only. And, I'm guessing that's what's happening now which is driving the indy insane.

If that's actually what's happening in the DRM world then I agree they better fix it & fix it fast. It's one thig to require payment for product but it's a whoooole other thing to put limits on fair use once someone is an owner. And actually, IIRC they had a few studies 2 or 3 years ago ... but they didn't like the answers, so they killed the studies. If you want I'll ask around to see who has what.

But, now that you've explained it ... the DRM issue pisses me off. A whole lot. But the thing to realise is that while RIAA (dunno the MPAA so well, so I'll leave them out for now) may seem like the bogeyman in all of this, they really just represent what the industry tells them to, which means this ugliness oozes back to the artists themselves (at least the ones who are a little more aware of their careers ... IOW, when writing those angry letters, leave poor Lindsey Lohan alone, girl isn't right).
;~))))