U2 versus YouTube ...?

Courtesy of his good friend Simon Haslam (Abel & Imray), the IPKat reports on the BBC's account that rock band U2 manager's Paul McGuinness has urged internet service providers to help end illegal music downloads, pleading for the disconnection of those who acquire tracks illegally. Speaking at the Midem conference in Cannes, he emphasized that it was time for artists to stand up against what he called the "shoddy, careless and downright dishonest way they have been treated in the digital age". To blame are record labels and governments who "created a thieves' charter" by agreeing that ISPs should not be responsible for what passed along their networks, adding:
"If you were a magazine advertising stolen cars, handling the money for stolen cars and seeing to the delivery of stolen cars, the police would soon be at your door. That's no different to an ISP, but they say they can't do anything about it. If you steal a laptop from a store or don't pay for your broadband service, you'll soon be cut off and nicked".
The Internet Service Providers Association has always maintained that it cannot be held responsible for illegal peer-to-peer traffic because it is "merely a conduit" of such material.

Says Simon,
"If I recall correctly, U2 used to provide tapes (remember those?) with U2 music on one side but blank on the other so that you could tape someone else's music on to the blank side".
U2 position on taping here
U2 versus YouTube ...? U2 versus YouTube ...? Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.