Freedom of Information Is No Crime
The CCC regards those lawsuits filed by the German section of the IFPI as highly questionable, to say the least. We won't accept the music industry trying to accomplish their goals by striking ordinary users with awe as the industry claims immense amounts for indemnification. Such claims are not even enforcable by law in Germany. The IFPI's intentions are rather to intimidate participants of filesharing services. This becomes clear with the recent campaign of the GVU (Society for the Prosecution of Copyright Infringements). Here, too, legal misinformation is spread concerning the culpability of copyright infringements, to shy away users from using p2p-services.
Copyright is no natural right, but rather a compensation for the author as he or she makes her or his work available for the general public. Predominantly, copyright is a part of the personal rights. It should also be noted that German law, unlike its American counterpart, doesn't know the concept of copyright being given away, e.g. an artist can never lose the rights for his songs to a record company. "Copyright" is therefore only partially a translation for the German "Urheberrecht". To secure the author's economical existence, certain rights to distribute his/her work are given to him or her, but they underlie certain limitations. For example, a work may still be copied freely for private use. This right, also called 'fair use', is a part of the freedom of information and a fundamental human right in the eyes of the CCC.
The music industry now is trying to undermine this fact with countless campaigns. It tries to drag down the concept of fair use to the same level with child pornography and Nazi-propaganda. The chairman of the board of the Society for Musical Performance and Mechanical Copyrights (GEMA) demanded on the German music fair Popkomm that p2p users should be pursuited using the same ways and means which have been in use by the police to pursuit child pornographers and neonazis. This is an immense infamy and degradation for filesharing users.
But the economically rather unimportant copyright industry wants to go still one step further. The new 'Guidelines of the European Union for sanctions and procedures to protect the rights of intellectual property' grant them the right to search private homes without first obtaining a search warrant from a judge. Misuse and even industrial espionage are guaranteed to happen.
So it is only natural to ask: "Will the population be criminalised as a whole, because the industry is not able to deliver the offer for the overwhelming demand? Will the individual's freedom be sacrificed for an industry's demand for market stability? How come you can make more money with cell phone ringtones than with music?"
Next to the political reasons for a boycott of the music industry, there are also a few very practical reasons:
with the profits from CD sales the industry finances the legal actions against our children. Why should we, as a society, finance the munition of the enemy?
with the profits from CD sales, the music industry finances research and production of DRM and other measures of anti-copy mechanisms. Why should we finance technologies that will keep us from exerting our right to freedom of information and fair use?
we have bought our right to privately copy CDs by paying GEMA dues on every raw CD and DVD and on the CD-burners as well. It is inacceptable that this right is now referred to as 'stealing'.
Why are p2p-networks so popular? There are a few reasons:
the quality of publicly available music has gone down. Music now seems only to exist to guarantee a bigger turnover for the industry. Since most modern bands are only in the charts for a short time now, less people bother to buy expensive CDs of songs and bands which nobody will remember after a few years anyway.
the prices for audio CDs are too high. At least the main target group of teenagers and young adults can't afford the highly priced CDs. Studies prove that popmusic's chief purchasers are adults of 40 years and up.
CD anti-copy provisions detains people from playing their CDs in any player except the very newest. Even many CD-player for cars cannot play DRM-protected CDs. This drives many people to the filesharing services to download and burn their music to run in their players.
the variety in music stores is limited. If you're looking for rare pieces, the filesharing services are your last resort. For people who don't live in big cities or don't have the time to visit countless music stores, the p2p-network offer the chances of finding the favorite song from 30 years ago without much running or waiting.
filesharing services are the ideal distribution channel for the new generation - the only thing missing is an appropriate payment function. The music industry has missed out on the internet movement, while the listeners have found their own way to use current technology to share their music collection and make new friends. Most listeners would be very happy to pay their favorite artist for the music they make. But there are yet ways to be found to get the money to the artist in a more direct way.
The music industry should stop whining now! The CCC is therefore demands: hit them where they it will hurt them the most. Take away their turnover! So they won't be able to use their profits to take on legal actions and advertisement campaigns against their customers.
The CCC has made banner and images for free use to support this campaign. Filesharers may voice their anger using our images and linking to our protest in this way. Creative pixelpushers are called upon to create their own banners and images in protest of the IFPI's legal actions. Please send the link to your image (not the image itself and no attachments!) to
mail@ccc.de . We ask people to link to us from as many websites as possible.
Lastly we would like to point you to the words of the German comedian Dirk Bach at the 2004 Echo Awards to the congregated 'Pop Idol'-style clone-bands: "How dare you wonder at your sales going down?"
Zitat
Original von CID_God_at
