Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

cityoflondon.police.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#41

Post by 001sky »

seiji wrote: post #38
r0h1n wrote: post #14

Wow, that was fast. Just a day ago the UK PM, David Cameron, appointed an ex-music industry executive as his "IP advisor" - http://www.managingip.com/Article.aspx?ArticleId=3254862

The UK (and maybe everywhere else?) corporate music people have a lot of very old industry insiders who think music can't be produced without studios (they "provide value," after all), think the internet is a fad, and think all real music should be sold on physical media.

Werent "record" labels were replaced by >Copy >Paste...with the advent of pro-tools?

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#42

Post by seiji »

001sky wrote: post #41
seiji wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK (and maybe everywhere else?) corporate music people have a lot of very old industry insiders who think music can't be produced without studios (they "provide value," after all), think the internet is a fad, and think all real music should be sold on physical media.

Werent "record" labels were replaced by >Copy >Paste...with the advent of pro-tools?

Exactly. They don't realize that though. I was at a talk with some UK IFPI execs last year who just didn't understand computers or the internet or online self-promotional distribution. It was kinda astounding. He kept harping on the point that "you just can't get quality" unless you're backed by a studio belonging to his organization.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#43

Post by anoncowherd »

aspensmonster wrote: post #35
anoncowherd wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I'm telling you that nobody gives a shit, because they just want to listen to music. I do realize that people are selfish and just want everything for free, and that computers & the Internet enable them to circumvent having to pay for music. That doesn't change anything about my point, though. Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced ? Again,…

>Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced? No, I don't realize that. The overwhelming majority of music never makes any money because making money isn't the point. Making money is the point for a small contingent of entrenched players who carved out a market for themselves decades ago and are now seeing it disrupted. Far more artists fear obscurity…

> No, I don't realize that. The overwhelming majority of music never makes any money because making money isn't the point.

I do realize that music is a passion for musicians, but record companies are in it for a profit. They're businesses, and they're what I was referring to.

You're free to seek out indie musicians on CDBaby or whatever and then download the shit out of their music, but even they'd at least prefer that you buy it. That's why their music can be found online.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#44

Post by anoncowherd »

spacelizard wrote: post #40
anoncowherd wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I'm telling you that nobody gives a shit, because they just want to listen to music. I do realize that people are selfish and just want everything for free, and that computers & the Internet enable them to circumvent having to pay for music. That doesn't change anything about my point, though. Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced ? Again,…

>Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced? I cringe whenever I hear someone express this sentiment, it's the equivalent of the nuclear option. Do you really think these companies are just going to get frustrated, pack up their toys and go home? No, of course not. It's the same reason I don't buy into these "starving artist" sob stories: no one can e…

> Do you really think these companies are just going to get frustrated, pack up their toys and go home?

As I said, if the producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then they'll stop producing music. See, that would actually be the point where they'll just throw in the towel. If everyone thought that they're somehow entitled to receiving music for free, like the guy I responded to, then the only music you could get would be the musical equivalent of open-source.

> It's the same reason I don't buy into these "starving artist" sob stories: no one can escape market forces.

Oh believe me, I'm all for market forces. I'm not saying musicians should be entitled to making a living through music either.

> The fact of the matter is, that business landscape is extremely competitive and typically requires a large initial investment. It's always been this way. The one force that seems to be an equalizer is technology in general getting cheaper and cheaper, NOT the protectionism known as copyright.

Note that you're actually talking about business there. So am I.

I don't even support IP enforcement or patents etc, I'm just saying that if no one takes music producers up on their offer of voluntary exchanges of music for money, then all those who are producing it to make money will simply stop.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#45

Post by spacelizard »

anoncowherd wrote: post #44
spacelizard wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced? I cringe whenever I hear someone express this sentiment, it's the equivalent of the nuclear option. Do you really think these companies are just going to get frustrated, pack up their toys and go home? No, of course not. It's the same reason I don't buy into these "starving artist" sob stories: no one can e…

> Do you really think these companies are just going to get frustrated, pack up their toys and go home? As I said, if the producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then they'll stop producing music. See, that would actually be the point where they'll just throw in the towel. If everyone thought that they're somehow entitled to receiving music for free, like the guy I responded to, then the only music you could get…

When the listener isn't paying, there will always be someone else to foot the bill: the artist. This is already happening on a wide scale. You forget the primary function of a music production company is to act as a bank for the artist, they'll sign a contract with anyone who is willing to re-pay a loan. The point I was making is that it's not things like Grooveshark discouraging those practices, it's cheap technology which has made it more cost-effective for artists to just avoid production companies all together.

And this is a GOOD thing. We don't need them. Those companies filled a needed economic role before when cost-effective recording and distribution was a problem, but it's not anymore. Keeping them around is just encouraging economic abuse, i.e. rent-seeking in the form of royalties and licensing fees.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#46

Post by deletes »

UVB-76 wrote: post #36
DanBC wrote: post #15

So, the police should only be getting involved in copyright infringement when done as trade, right? right? They seem to be keeping that bit quiet. See section 198 of the relevant law, which is clear about the need for business to be involved for a criminal offence. ( http://www.ipo.gov.uk/cdpact1988.pdf ) See section 7 ( http://copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright_law ) - where they don't mention "tradin…

Based on the initial arrests made by this unit, it would appear the target remains commercial IP infringement: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/sep/13/police-intellectu...

There are people still pirating on physical media !?

I think it is ok to go after the sharks but where do you draw the line, 10 copies, a 100?

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#47

Post by angersock »

anoncowherd wrote: post #31
angersock wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'm telling you that nobody gives a shit , because they just want to listen to music . Look, I'll happily debate intellectual property structures and incentives and all the rest, but the thing--the big elephant in the room--is that everybody just wants to be able to push a button and get music. At the end of the day, the core relationship is between the artist and the listener--everything else, be it recording or…

> And I'm telling you that nobody gives a shit, because they just want to listen to music. I do realize that people are selfish and just want everything for free, and that computers & the Internet enable them to circumvent having to pay for music. That doesn't change anything about my point, though. Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced ? Again,…

I ask again: so what?

Musicians don't need producers--in fact, this has been a role only recently filled in the 20th century. They don't need them to perform, they don't need them to record, they don't need them to make money. In fact, you can very easily find examples of producers doing more hard than good...just ask any fan of Streetlight Manifesto.

Technology, both in recording and broadcasting, has advanced to the point where we don't need these gatekeepers. The market will adapt to supply good-but-cheap recording gear for musicians who can't afford lots of studio time. The market will create cheap online labels--already has.

You didn't say a damn thing the artists, man. You just kept trying to find a way to fund the middlemen. People like you are what'll kill music, if anything.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#48

Post by tristanj »

regularfry wrote: post #4

> The unit will also be focused on influencing online behaviour by site owners, service providers and consumers through education, prevention and enforcement activity, and providing offenders where appropriate with opportunities to accept restorative justice. Er... is that implying that a police unit is being given judicial powers?

The City of London has a unique legal position that lets type of thing happen. If you look into this corporation's history it will make much more sense.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#49

Post by anoncowherd »

spacelizard wrote: post #45
anoncowherd wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you really think these companies are just going to get frustrated, pack up their toys and go home? As I said, if the producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then they'll stop producing music. See, that would actually be the point where they'll just throw in the towel. If everyone thought that they're somehow entitled to receiving music for free, like the guy I responded to, then the only music you could get…

When the listener isn't paying, there will always be someone else to foot the bill: the artist. This is already happening on a wide scale. You forget the primary function of a music production company is to act as a bank for the artist, they'll sign a contract with anyone who is willing to re-pay a loan. The point I was making is that it's not things like Grooveshark discouraging those practices, it's cheap technolog…

> When the listener isn't paying, there will always be someone else to foot the bill: the artist.

Yep, it's possible his music is just not good enough, and that he should pursue other ways of making a living. Market forces and all.

> You forget the primary function of a music production company is to act as a bank for the artist, they'll sign a contract with anyone who is willing to re-pay a loan

Well, I'm not sure it's that simple. They're expecting a return on their investment. If a new artist signs up and takes on a $1M "loan", but then proceeds to sell zero records, how will the loan get paid back?

> The point I was making is that it's not things like Grooveshark discouraging those practices, it's cheap technology which has made it more cost-effective for artists to just avoid production companies all together.

Sure, it's never been cheaper to make and sell music online. That's fine, but I was talking about the business side of things, where music producers really do expect/hope people to pay for it, because otherwise they wouldn't be putting it up for sale.

It's quite effortless to by-pass paying for music, but that doesn't mean the music you're happily downloading for free was meant to be free.

Re: City of London Police Launch Intellectual Property Crime Unit

#50

Post by icebraining »

anoncowherd wrote: post #31
angersock wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'm telling you that nobody gives a shit , because they just want to listen to music . Look, I'll happily debate intellectual property structures and incentives and all the rest, but the thing--the big elephant in the room--is that everybody just wants to be able to push a button and get music. At the end of the day, the core relationship is between the artist and the listener--everything else, be it recording or…

> And I'm telling you that nobody gives a shit, because they just want to listen to music. I do realize that people are selfish and just want everything for free, and that computers & the Internet enable them to circumvent having to pay for music. That doesn't change anything about my point, though. Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced ? Again,…

Do you realize that if music producers can't make a satisfactory profit, then music will just not be produced?

I doubt it, but if that is true, then there's a natural incentive to pay for music, and there's no need for copyright law; if people want music to be produced, they'll be forced to pay.

Post reply on HN