www.out-law.com
"The UK music industry has rejected the Government's proposal to legalise the transfer of music from CDs to MP3 players without a levy. It has asked for a tax on devices like Apple iPods which it says should compensate artists for the transfer."
But what percentage of that is going to the artist and how much is the government taking for its own greedy mits? surely we should be legitimately be able to copy our own music that WE have bought with our precious money onto our mp3 players or PC's.
The UK Music Business Group (UMBG) disagrees:
"We acknowledge that consumers clearly want to format shift and also place enormous value on the transferability of music. Music fans clearly deserve legal clarity in this area as well as the freedom to enjoy any music they have legitimately obtained.
But it is not only music lovers who benefit here. Enormous value is derived by those technology companies and manufacturers who enable consumers to copy. UK creators and rights owners are legally entitled to share in this value - as they hold the exclusive right to reproduce their music - but are currently excluded from the value chain."
But it is not only music lovers who benefit here. Enormous value is derived by those technology companies and manufacturers who enable consumers to copy. UK creators and rights owners are legally entitled to share in this value - as they hold the exclusive right to reproduce their music - but are currently excluded from the value chain."
Surely banning sites and file-sharing software can decrease enormously the rate in which people are copying and thieving music. Or aren't artists already earning millions of pounds every year to be worrying about it?
1 comment:
this is a good article. They is also useful terminology you should use here, ie format shift and transferability etc
Post a Comment