unjapanologist (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
unjapanologist) wrote2011-05-30 06:10 pm
unjapanologist) wrote2011-05-30 06:10 pm
Entry tags:
[Watch this video] Why the entertainment industry's current business model is not worth protecting
This video gives a quick overview of why we shouldn't assume that the business model of the entertainment industry is worth protecting against the things it hates, like piracy or unlicensed creation of derivative works (such as all kinds of fanstuff).
One, nearly every new medium or distribution channel for culture, from radio to the VCR, was lambasted as harmful to the entertainment industry when it first appeared. When a new medium is popularized, business models need to change along with it, because technology doesn't go away once it's out of the bag. The only way to prevent people from doing things on the internet is to take away their internet and their internet access machines, and who thinks that could possibly ever be doable, except for Mr. Sarkozy et al?
Two, as the speaker wrote in an earlier post: protecting current business models by strengthening copyright legislation, DRM, and other ways of controlling what people can do with media doesn't just have consequences for media companies. It affects not just what people can do with a music CD, but what they can do with any kind of information. It's nothing less than "rearchitecting of our law and technology to create the preconditions for repression, corruption and suppression of dissent". How could protecting the entertainment industry's current business model possibly be worth creating near-totalitarian restrictions on what people can do with information?
Cory Doctorow on copyright and piracy: 'Every pirate wants to be an admiral' (5 min)
One, nearly every new medium or distribution channel for culture, from radio to the VCR, was lambasted as harmful to the entertainment industry when it first appeared. When a new medium is popularized, business models need to change along with it, because technology doesn't go away once it's out of the bag. The only way to prevent people from doing things on the internet is to take away their internet and their internet access machines, and who thinks that could possibly ever be doable, except for Mr. Sarkozy et al?
Two, as the speaker wrote in an earlier post: protecting current business models by strengthening copyright legislation, DRM, and other ways of controlling what people can do with media doesn't just have consequences for media companies. It affects not just what people can do with a music CD, but what they can do with any kind of information. It's nothing less than "rearchitecting of our law and technology to create the preconditions for repression, corruption and suppression of dissent". How could protecting the entertainment industry's current business model possibly be worth creating near-totalitarian restrictions on what people can do with information?
Cory Doctorow on copyright and piracy: 'Every pirate wants to be an admiral' (5 min)