Call#: Van Pelt Library HV6773 .H56 2006
Toward the end of Chapter two, Hinduja defines what is considered copyright infringement. On pages 33 and 34 he quotes from the United States Copyright Office the rights of an owner of a copyright. These reasons include the right to reproduce the work in copies, to prepare works based upon the original work, to distribute copies, and to perform and display the work publicly. After this brief outline of copyright infringement, he goes into the copyright of sound recordings and digital music distribution.
Sound recordings have copyrights on the musical work which includes the notes and lyrics and also on the actual recording which is everything that goes into the production of a song written to a medium such as a cd. Hinduja gives examples of music piracy involving MP3s. According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the legal concepts are copyright infringement and vicarious liability. A person who makes MP3s available for distribution for example is violating copyright infringement. Vicarious liability occurs when a person who is able to control the actions of a copyright violator fails to do so. To further explain digital music piracy, Hinduja cites numerous examples of legislation and gives a brief explaination of each example.
In chapter 7, Hinduja talks about how the music industry has struggled with the rise in popularity of the MP3. According to many supporters, the music industry was too late in their embracement of MP3 phenomenon and that they would have experienced a greater increase in revenue had they not spent time trying to combat the "digital music revolution."
Hinduja also gives advice on different marketing strategies to increase revenue in the music industry. He gives examples of a few musicians and their strategies to market their music. One example he gives is David Bowie and his use of the internet to expand his popularity on a global scale. Bowie offered free downloads for songs off of upcoming albums and also live concerts to fans who visited his website. He also held contests such as opportunities for fans to write lyrics to have the chance to be included on one of his new albums.
The book provides useful information on the subject of piracy and gives strategies that could be useful to the music industry in order to fight piracy.
tagged book hinduja music piracy by graul ...and 2 other people ...on 24-NOV-08
Call#: Van Pelt Library HV6773 .H56 2006
In the later chapters of the book, Hinduja utilizes crime theories in effort to discover why people participate in illegal file sharing. While much of his analysis is similar to the suggestions of other piracy studies, he makes one interesting proposal that is worth noting: “Even if [the students] do view downloading and shoplifting in a similar light, it is also possible that the former is considered a “smarter” and more admirable crime, and therefore attracts much more participation.” He does not provide further inquiry into the suggestion, but it still provides an interesting perspective on the issue.
Hinduja also proposes that a new business model must be developed that takes advantage of the digital dissemination of music. He also suggests, as many supporters of a new business model would contend, that if a new model had been created and implemented immediately following the explosion of the MP3 phenomenon, the industry may have grown tremendously during this period (not to mention the negative reputation that their anti-piracy campaigning has bought them).
Hinduja also provides anecdotal evidence supporting the success of online music distribution in establishing loyal fans and further sales. He mentions Tom Petty’s distribution of free full-length MP3 tracks from his 1999 album prior to its release in exchange for access to email addresses of fans. This produced a database of Tom Petty fans that was easily accessible for marketing uses.
Perhaps the most important suggestion in this section of the book is that a “more harmonious relationship with the consumer population should result as the industry demonstrates that they are willing to work with the public to satisfy their music needs…rather than opposing any change to the status quo.” This statement is exactly what my thesis is all about, a new less-brash response to file sharing by record companies who have a lot to gain from acceptance of the new technology.
tagged RIAA filesharing by carlytb ...and 2 other people ...on 28-NOV-06
Call#: Van Pelt Library HV6773 .H56 2006
Though this book is biased against internet file sharing, it provides a good background on some of the issues that arise when dealing with the topic. Hinduja provides a difference between file sharing and CD stealing that neither the detractors nor supporters of file sharing had thought to mention, perhaps because it is so obvious. Theft of digital property over the Internet is much easier and quicker than physical theft. He goes on to attempt to liken the two, claiming that the desire to innovate and develop creative works can be stifled if the rewards are less than anticipated, but there is a clear argument against this. That is, most artists struggle for years making absolutely no money before “making it,” and even then there is no guarantee of survival. These artists cannot anticipate that the returns will be high, because the likelihood of this to be the case is so low. It is in fact, these artists who struggle for years for no money who benefit from file sharing, as it enables them to share their work and develop a fan base without the stifling influence of a giant record label. Thus, for these artists, the same harmful peer-to-peer network that supposedly squelches the desire to innovate actually stimulates it. It provides the possibility that their work will be heard, which would otherwise be unlikely.
Though the author is against file sharing, he admits that digital intellectual property is characterized as a public good. Its utility is not decreased when the property is shared. It is also an “information good,” with a marginal cost of production of about zero. Though the author describes these factors as augmenting the attractiveness of the commodity, he informs the reader that because of the attractiveness, the music industry refused for years to embrace the format changes and introduce it into their business model. This seems at first to make little to no sense, until we consider the historical resistance to change in this industry.
Hinduja further describes the government’s general resistance to legislate on the matter of punishment for copyright infringement, suggesting that a reason for this is that most individuals lacked the capacity to violate the laws. This is no longer true, and perhaps the government should step in and make their position on the matter known. This potentially contradicts Lessig’s argument that the technology must develop before rules are made concerning its use.
tagged MP3 RIAA copyright filesharing peer-to-peer by carlytb ...and 2 other people ...on 28-NOV-06


