IP = Internet Protocol

IP = Intellectual Property

Integrity = a quality we would like to see in politics



Iptegrity.com is released under a Creative Commons licence.

Please attribute the author when quoting or using it as a reference source.

The correct citation is shown on each article.

Don't miss iptegrity

Use Live Bookmarks in your browser to keep up to date with iptegrity.com (RSS feed)

Login / Comment

You will need to log in to make a comment on any of the Policy Matters articles.
Username

Password

Remember me
Password Reminder
No account yet? Create one
It is free to create an account. When you have created it, you will get an email, telling you how to activate it.

 Support IPTEGRITY

Iptegrity.com provides comment and news on EU Internet policy that is independent of all commercial and political interests. 


Your donation will help to keep it that way.

 

Home arrow Policy Matters arrow Digital Britain arrow Don't punish our fans, say UK musicians
Don't punish our fans, say UK musicians
Written by Monica Horten   
Sep 16, 2009 at 09:15 PM

UK musicians, composers and producers "vehemently oppose" the UK proposals to use network filtering and "technial measures" for copyright enforcement. The costs of implementing such measures are way out of proportion to the supposed benefits. Above all, they say, do not punish their fans.

 

A coalition of UK performing artists, composers and music producers, including well-known names such as Annie Lennox,  Radiohead, Robbie Williams, and Tom Jones, have voiced their opposition to the UK government's plans to enforce copyright on the Internet using "technical measures".  Of particular interest for the European Commission, they highlight a number of economic reasons why they oppose it.

 

The coalition comprises the Featured Artists Coalition (FAC), British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors (BASCA) and the Music Producers Guild (MPG). Their views were made clear in an joint statement  published last week: 

 

..."we have serious reservations about

the content and scope of the proposed legislation outlined in the consultation on P2P file-sharing. Processes of monitoring, notification and sanction are not conducive to achieving a vibrant, functional, fair and competitive market for music. As a result we believe that the specific questions asked by the consultation are not only unanswerable but indicate a mindset so far removed from that of the general public and music consumer that it seems an extraordinarily negative document.

 

The very fuzzy estimates for the annual benefits of such legislation (£200 million per year) make clear that such  estimates are based firmly upon the premise that a P2P downloaded track equals a lost sale. This "substitutional"  argument is, in reality, no more than "lobbyists' speak": it has little support from logic and no economist would seek to weave such a number into a metric aimed at quantifying a ‘value gap' for the industries challenged by P2P."

 

The coalition  says there  are multiple causes for the loss of CD sales. File-sharers contribute indirectly to music industry revenues,  via concert tickets and merchandise, and to a certain extent file-sharing contributes to promoting and building the image of the artist. They want individual fans to be differentiated from commercial infringers.

 

They also state that the estimated costs of implementing the government's proposals - £65-85 million in the first year - are a "gross underestimate" and vastly disproportionate to the intended result. They believe the government's measures will do more harm than good to the music industry.

 

The joint statement on P2P legislation  is available here.

 

Another comment from the 1709 copyright blog is here,  making  the point that the recording industry needs artists more than they need it.

 

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed. The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2009) Don't punish our fans, say UK musicians  , http://www.iptegrity.com  16 September  2009. 

 


User Comments
Please login or register to add comments

Last Updated ( Sep 16, 2009 at 09:19 PM )
<Previous   Next>

 "We who love the Internet

say that user rights are

defined by what we use our

Internet subscriptions for.

We do not want to be

reduced to consumers so

that our rights are only 

what is in the subscription

agreement. "

Eva-Britt Svensson, MEP


Your Freedom to

 repeal the DE Act

 


La Quadrature du Net

La Quadrature du Net

Don't disconnect us!  

European Commission Creative Content Online consultation

AK Zensur

AK Vorrat

Open Rights Group

open rights group

Exgae

  Code

GetUp Action for Australia

 Campaign against Internet filtering in Australia

...AK Vorrat - against data retention

  AK vorrat