As I remember what was said she was calling for was the option of a _voluntary_ system where users could choose to buy a licence that allowed them to download the content. The Open Rights Group was not arguing for a blanket tariff and said the leaked legislation was wrong. She even said the government should stay out of legislating on this issue for a while Its worth reading ORGs submission to the Gowers review, they where one of the major players in stopping the music industry from extending copy right term, they are not very lightly to be the people to then go and argue that the music industry should be given money for people simply using the internet. The Open Rights Group is the UK equivalent to the EFF in America.
Glyn Wintle (Avid Open Rights Group supporter)
----- Original Message ---- From: MJ Ray mjr@phonecoop.coop To: discussion@fsfeurope.org; dgerard@gmail.com Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 12:56:57 PM Subject: Re: Copyright term extension rererevisited?
"David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
May I recommend to all in the UK the openrightsgroup.org mailing list and wiki for detailed dissection of this sort of thing. ORG is also getting into the press regularly.
Are they worth recommending? Yeah, they get into the press: I heard Becky of the ORG on BBC Radio 4's World at One earlier this week, but she seemed to support collective licensing of ISPs! http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-fileshar...
Collective licensing of companies is a step towards collective licensing of the whole population through taxation and the establishment of New Enclosures, which should be resisted. Bad ORG. Any ORG members here going to try to correct that?
But while apparently not completely friendly, ORG have campaigned against term extension before:- http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/Copyright_Term_Extension
I didn't find any discussion of this particular event yet, though.
Regards,
Glyn Wintle glynwintle@yahoo.com wrote:
As I remember what was said she was calling for was the option of a _voluntary_ system where users could choose to buy a licence that allowed them to download the content.
Becky uploaded her words to http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/02/12/government-to-ban-illegal-fileshar...
The bit that confused me was "They’re really a potential market for rights holders and if rights holders got together with ISPs and talked about licensing agreements much like the way that radio stations licence to play music on air then I think so long as the government stays out of legislating for a while that could be an emerging business model that could work for consumers, the record industry and internet users."
I'm not their potential market, I don't want to work for the record industry and I suspect the BPI is not going to be satisfied by anything short of 100% ISP take-up, so even having this idea in play seems dangerous to me.
[...] Its worth reading ORGs submission to the Gowers review, they where one of the major players in stopping the music industry from extending copy right term, they are not very lightly to be the people to then go and argue that the music industry should be given money for people simply using the internet.
I was surprised, let me tell you! I spluttered on my sarnie!
The Open Rights Group is the UK equivalent to the EFF in America.
Can you join ORG like EFF? Else why would someone call themselves an avid supporter but not be a member?
It's not clear to me whether EFF is directly accountable to its members or not. So I guess I should view ORG like EFF or SFC - they sometimes pay for helpful stuff so don't discourage them, but they're generally not to be recommended either, outside a few narrow cases.
Regards,