Today the US Congress heard from many in the digital/internet industry
about the future of music online. I thought it would be important for all
of us on the AJ listserv to be aware of these issues as it may affect
certainly those of us in the US before we realize it.
I urge you to check out Onehouse CEO, Jim Griffin's comments to Congress at
http://www.senate.gov/~judiciary/7112000_jg.htm
Another article besides the Wired one is available here
http://www.inside.com/story/Story_Cached/0,2770,6643_9,00.html
Gen
From Wired News, available online at:
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,37485,00.html
Napster Goes to Washington
by Brad King
11:55 a.m. Jul. 11, 2000 PDT
Digital music heavyweights gathered in Washington, D.C. to give
testimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on downloading and
file trading, but the two most controversial figures took over the
event.
Tuesday's hearing marked the first time that Napster CEO Hank Barry
and founder Shawn Fanning would publicly meet some of their main
detractors, including Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich, MP3.com CEO
Michael Robertson, and Sony Music Entertainment New Technology
President Fred Erlich.
The Senators coordinating the "Future of Digital Music" hearing were
more interested in learning how music and technology can peacefully
converge than in allowing the combative and often litigious companies
to escalate and air their grievances.
"The committee will examine the intersection of these new technologies
and the copyrights of music creators, and explore shared opportunities
available to both the artists and technologists," said a written
release about the hearing.
Each speaker was invited to represent his particular interest in the
digital music era, but Barry and Fanning's presence quickly turned the
proceedings into a debate on the merits and pitfalls of Napster.
Saying that his company's user base had swelled to 20 million, Barry
reiterated his frequently stated point that like other advances in
technology, Napster allows people to sample more music, which
ultimately leads to more people buying CDs.
"Napster does not copy files," Barry said. "It does not provide the
technology for copying files. Napster does not make MP3 files. It does
not transfer files. Napster simply fascilitates communication among
people interested in music. It is a return to the original information
sharing approach of the Internet, allowing for a depth and scale of
information that is truly revolutionary."
Napster's adversaries countered by talking up the importance of
protecting songwriters and musicians while pushing forward with their
business models.
"If the market is being driven more by perception than by the
principles and rules that artists, consumers, government, industry,
and professionals have set out, then effective governance no longer
works and anarchy has taken over," Emusic.com CEO Gene Hoffman said.
Hoffman, whose company sells digital music, did not advocate
government intervention, but he did recognize the need to control
copyright in the digital music era. But he felt the different
industries -- musicians, labels, and technologists would work together
in ironing out the details of how to protect copyrights.
Robertson who has criticized Napster since his own battle with the
major labels began, focused a bulk of his time demonstrating the
my.mp3.com service that allows users to stream their personal music
collection from a central server.
For all of the posturing, the arguments that took place might be moot
in just a few months, said hearing observer Jonathan Potter, the
executive director of the Digital Media Association.
"In time, perhaps less time than today's witnesses contemplate, DiMA
anticipates that file-sharing technologies, like the VCR and cassette
tapes and the wax records of our past, will be embraced by the two
most important components of the music value chain -- creators and
consumers."
In a welcome respite from talk of the legal wrangling which have
engulfed the industry over the past months, Onehouse CEO Jim Griffin
delivered a heartfelt plea to the committee.
While advocating the delivery of music that "feels" free to the
consumers -- by creating service models which stream music on-demand
in subscription and advertising supported models -- he also implored
the committee to remember that this argument will set the benchmark
for how other information will be delivered to consumers.
"Librarians schooled me in what could now be called the instruments of
piracy," Griffin said. "The library was the first place that I saw a
photocopy machine and a tape recorder. Use of these copying tools was
openly encouraged..."
Griffin said that since the music industry is going to be developing
the first business models that other electronic publishers will
follow, the restrictions that are placed upon it need to be very
carefully crafted.
"No one called us pirates… We were scholars."
According to Potter, committee chairman Orrin Hatch said that if
record companies and music publishers don't reasonably license their
music and make it available in various file formats, they would
consider legislation to force the companies to license their music to
all comers.
Hatch also invited Hilary Rosen, the president of the Recording
Industry Association of America, to the witness table where he
proceeded to question her regarding the fair use clause, which has
been at the center of both the MP3.com and Napster defense in their
respective lawsuits against the recording industry.
Hatch asked Rosen if several hypothetical situations, such as making
an audiocassette of a CD to give to a spouse, constituted fair use.
Refusing to answer, she replied that Hatch was "leading me down the
Napster path."
Copyright 1994-2000 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 12 2000 - 09:58:29 MET DST