Tracking the Copyright Consultation Submissions: July 31 - August 9, 2009 |
| Print | |
|
Saturday August 15, 2009
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As promised, I will continue to update the key points found in the hundreds of submissions received by the government as part of the copyright consultation. The July 20 - 24th summary was posted here, July 25 - 30th here. This chart bring the data up to August 9th, though more submissions for these dates may still be coming. Further, with four weeks left in the consultation, what are you waiting for - speak out on copyright today!
Comments (7)
Sébastien Duquette
said:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
... "Submissions against works being available in digital or other forms for free" Are there really people asking for this ? I didn't look at the submissions but this sounds strange to me. I would understand people asking that their work should not be shared on the Internet without their consent, but asking that works should not be made available for free ? I mean, seriously ? If I write a book and decide to give it for free it's my own business. Same goes for any form of work. |
|
@Sébastien@Sébastien Who do you really think is behind this submission? What they don't want is artist having success uploading their music/creations on the net for free and make a better living without the need of the Industry that is sucking our beloved artist's blood, how much in percentage do you think they are really getting off the sales? Not much, so if the couple of groups of musicians actually uploading their music for free starts to have great success they are scared all of them will follow and lose their grip on the rights to works that they use to make a lot of un-legitimate profits. In fact it is how it should be, this way unknown artists/creators can get recognize not just locally or nationally but rather worldwide. Everyone should know that they make more money from the concerts anyways so it will benefit them to have a lot more people aware of their works/creations. It's not to protect the artist but rather again make sure they stay in their grip so they can continue sucking them off from everything they create. |
|
grunt I begin to regret my original explosion, given the diversity here. it's the same impluse that makes me want to club conservatives, thou... watch the film youtube/area163 then figure out what happens when both the formal amd underground ecos fail. china-town HD, anyone? packrat |
|
This is really interresting! You oughta know. http://www.musictechpolicy.com/2009/08/million-dollar-wedgie.html |
|
How many submissions? Michael, when you post these summaries an indication of the total number of submissions would be useful as well, to put the scales in perspective. For instance, based on the numbers above I can deduce that there were at least 465 submissions. However, it would be useful to have some sort of idea about what percentage of the submissions incorporated each position. |
|
... Can I just clarify what a levi is? is it a small fee in order to file share? one of the above stated a levi for the right to file share? this might be a fair compramise if it were at a reasonable monthly fee for unlimited downloading. |
|
@Observer I think I may be too dense, I couldn't figure out what that article is getting at. |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
