Wednesday, May 7, 2008

The main problem of the digital age

The other day came news: recording company Sony BMG Music Entertainment announced that develops new subscription music service.

According to Rolf Schmidt-Holz, managing director of Sony BMG, users of the service will receive unlimited access to the entire catalog of tracks companies (which millions of records). It is expected that the monthly subscription fee for the new service range from $9 to $12, and tracks could be playing at all modern mp3-player including iPod. However, until the projected date of launching the new service is unknown. Indeed, in recent months, similar news comes just a bundle. Among other things, this shows a changing attitude towards copyright. Yet it is one of the most painful problems of the digital era. " Around him break a lot of copies; disputes on the issue of copyright occur in the network with an enviable regularity. All the arguments have already been expressed on numerous occasions, but none anyone has not persuaded. In the end, everything boils down to one outcome: the recruitment of mutual recriminations and insults in the spirit: "You thieves!" -- "A bourgeois you!" Let's try to understand: what did happen?
As water, a few aspects of the problem. But still the main key, no - this is technological progress in the face lbami three parties: the creative community, and business ethics. Over the last two a half-dozen years the development of technological progress has meant that the means of mass printing and dissemination of information have become extremely simple and accessible: they can use virtually any. Printer, copier, CD and DVD-recorders, flash cards ... In memory mp3 player easily can be written in high-quality digitization Dzhokondu (free to download via r2r-network) and then as long as you want to enjoy it at least a PC screen, while cell phone ... Two dozen years ago would have had to buy an art gallery or take that Big Soviet Encyclopedia. And now copied - I do not want to! About the distribution of such pirated (conditionally speaking) copies and should not speak. The Internet made for the unlimited possibilities, and tend to check the information anywhere. Water hole will find ... Remember: with only one file-sharing networks already how many years of struggling. And how - poboroli? All this is what? Yes to the fact that in our times, to preserve intact the copyright to works of the intellect - music, films, paintings, books, software - was simply impossible. And this is reality. Today, every himself and typography, and studio recording, and processing factory for the production of copies of films and theater. On the other hand, during the last century show-and mediabiznes became sufficiently powerful industry and can dictate its conditions to peace. A copyright - breeding substance of this business. You know, that copyrights on multyash-governmental Disney heroes still bring his descendants billions? Yet, the good, they all long been the world's cultural heritage.

In short, business dictating their conditions (clear which). And, consequently, lobbies adoption of relevant laws. But whether the laws to stop progress? Tell me something you've heard that after the invention of Gutenberg printing press to enact laws protecting the rights perepischikov books? I do not heard. There remains the question: whether the progress of digital technology (which made it possible pogolovnoe piracy) suffer not only the interests of businessmen, but also creators? And creators does not matter in what area - from musicians to software developers. At this time by a powerful business started a war "to protect the creators." It was chosen main strategy of resistance to progress, which is described by one phrase: "Everyone who enjoys the intellectual products derived not from the explicit permission of creators (and their descendants) - thieves and scoundrel." But stop! Here, we already are dealing with different - morally - aspect of the problem. Why consumers behave so badly: do not listen to persuasion, not afraid of laws and continue to use counterfeit copies of intellectual products? Owners of copyright generally explain this so that people are inherently flawed, and if there is an opportunity to steal with impunity - invariably stolen. But the mentality of modern man is far more difficult. For example, banal theft, for example, in the shop, is still unacceptable to the normal rights and fate remains marginalized. But pirated software enjoyed by virtually all pogolovno, like listening to music and watch movies. CD and DVD with control rafaktom sold everywhere in the city centre, and try to find licensing discs ... That is, society does not accept free use of others' intellectual product as a crime. In doing so, the very notion of "copyright" perceived by society, too, in its own way. Nobody will not assume the authorship of songs "The Beatles" or DDT. But download them "to halyavu" from the network - not a sin. It turns out that opponents of the free flow of intellectual product is not fighting with people, but from an ethical system, whose age has already many centuries. And in terms of the ethics share unselfishly - is not bad, but a good deed. Incidentally, the major world religions preach the same thing for centuries. Postulate of human culture: steal - it is bad, because theft threatens the stability of society. A altruism - is good, because this is a valid factor that contributes to the survival of society. That is why kids usually convince parents that on good-neighbourly have to give the boy play with your machine. According to the person who acquires its own money on a movie DVD, then, looking, spends his own time, translate it crashed there subtitles and spread it to all comers in the peer-to-peer network and does not require anything in return, in terms of public morality altruists. On the software situation is somewhat more confusing, but in fact similar. In addition, the rapid spread of free software with questions that had never been raised. Here's an example: if I can freely and legally obtain powerful office package OpenOffice, then why can not free to use a similar package of opportunities for MS Office? If some people do for me free OpenOffice, then why do I have to preying on people from Microsoft? This debate can be endless. Plus, a number usually neobsuzhdaemyh points. Here are some. After all, DVD or CD for the most part, law-abiding initially purchased in stores, and then spread into the network whether the thief is the one who bought them and then opened them to share? The cost of Windows XP Home Edition BOX about $140 (possibly outdated data). And the cost of OEM-version - $80. It turns out $60 charge for the box and instruction? Farewell, common sense! Poyekhali further. Opponents of the free flow of information claim that intellectual piracy is growing rapidly and here they certainly are right. Then who will explain that is as fast-growing royalties musicians and Hollywood stars, the salaries of programmers, revenues Microsoft? Against this backdrop, the thesis "Pirates rob hapless authors" somehow becomes irrelevant ... Analysts argue: tough opposition "sell - pirate and supports its consumer" has occurred, as a rule, precisely when there is not the dialogue. That is when the consumer simply intimidated, rather than argues its position. And by the way, and how to define the moment when it
or other product becomes universal heritage, and it should open up free access?

In general, it is obvious: the use of repressive measures against the pirates of intellectual serious effect will not. But the very intellectual piracy in the end may be in a fairly difficult position - if only because of a decline in the quality of content, is the object of piracy. So, you need to seek a mutually accepted solution. This option may become a new business scheme, providing all the same sort of payment mediakontenta (PO's talk about something as separately later), but the payment was far from the current level. Plus, most new schemes spread. About the initiative of Sony BMG Music Entertainment, we talked at the very beginning - etaky buffet for music lovers. Here is another example: recording labels are asked Apple to give them a portion of the money from iPod sales in exchange for the possibility for users to enjoy free online service iTunes Store for some time. And, for example, the record label Universal Music has joined Nokia Comes with Music, which allows customers to download music from Nokia, which originally cost embedded in the price of the device. By Comes with Music also plans to join label EMI. In general, the process has gone - albeit only in the area and copyright of musical content. Let's see, that will happen next.

1) "Get Money for Clicks" - Fastest Growing Domain Parking Company in the World.
2) Search your domain name wishing to have! FREE DOMAINS -

No comments:

Post a Comment