--- From: "Scott Matthews" <scott@private> To: <declan@private> Subject: EFF's Brad Templeton's response to Czarina Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 16:08:01 -0500 Hey Declan, In response to EFF chair Brad Templeton's response to Czarina's email: http://politechbot.com/pipermail/politech/2003-October/000138.html The EFF sends a pretty mixed message, no? Brad characterizes file-sharing as ripping off artists, and goes on to say that it is right to condemn people who get all their music without paying. And yet the EFF continues to tacitly endorse such file-sharing, running an ad campaign that says "file-sharing is music to our ears." http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/music-to-our-ears.php And as you yourself pointed out on CNET, the EFF previously suggested that the RIAA should be suing such infringers: http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5067473.html The more I try to understand what the EFF is shooting for, the more baffled I get. I've written some more here: http://www.turnstyle.com/blog In his email, Brad goes on to fault the RIAA and MPAA when they "pretend it's about stealing from the artists" but the EFF is likewise wrong when they pretend that copyright only protects an oligopic entertainment industry -- the same copyright laws also protect independent musicians, filmmakers, programmers, and so on. I'm one of them. He also talks about tangential copyright issues such as the DMCA's "anti-circumvention" provisions and the "broadcast flag" -- but these are SEPARATE issues. OK: fight to repeal the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, and stop the broadcast flag. But don't be fooled when the EFF uses those issues as a justification for file-sharing. The EFF often says something like: "we just want to find a way to get the artists paid." And sure, that sounds great, but so does most vaporware. Their seemingly preferred alternative "compulsory licensing" is so filled with holes that I'm surprised it's still seriously considered as a way to legitimize file-sharing: http://www.eff.org/share/legal.php As Aaron Swartz points out http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001016 when it comes to compulsory licensing, there's a tradeoff between privacy, accuracy, and security. I also explore some free speech issues here: http://www.turnstyle.com/blog It's time for the EFF to address these compulsory licensing concerns directly, without resorting more anti-RIAA rhetoric. If they cannot address these concerns, then it's time for the EFF to come up with a viable alternative. And given the absence of any viable alternative, it's time for the EFF to stop cheering on file-sharing. speak soon, Scott Matthews http://www.turnstyle.com/andromeda _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Nov 04 2003 - 05:17:31 PST