more music piracy

Music Piracy And the Audio Home Recording Act
The Music piracy and The Audio Home Recording Act, was originally a case
filed in 1992.The FBI petitioned the FCC to enhance government power on the regulation
of music. So this is not only an act but it is also, a case that caused, much controversy in
the early 90s.The case was filed by the Recording Industry Association of America
(RIAA) against Diamond Multimedia Systems Inc. This case was to stop the mp3 player
from being manufactured instead, the government is still consider to invent a censorship
tactic in order to stop the mass production of music piracy.
This act could stop copy-written music from being pirated; by creating new copy
protected disc that will not be able to play in computers.
“It required producers of digital recording devices to install in their systems a chip that implements a code-based system to monitor the copies of any copy made on that machine. The chip would allow a limited number of personal copies. On copies of copies, the quality of the recording would be degraded. Congress in essence required that the code of digital copying be modified to restore the imperfections that were natural in the earlier code”.
(Department of Commerce)
If this act were to be put into place, it would allow the Entertainment Companies
to recover from the sell lost from music piracy. The Audio Home Video Recording Act
gives the Entertainment Companies and government more power to regulate the Internet.
Also, the alteration of CDs’ will not only change the CD to be of lesser quality every time
it is copied. This alteration can also, help get rid of music pirates on the streets and has
the possibility of Internet users returning back to CD store to buy their CDs’ legally.
However, this act is very expensive for both the consumer and the entertainment
companies. If the software in the computers and CD’s players were to be change it could
cost the entertainment business millions of dollars. They would have to hire technicians
and special facilitators to handle this task and they would have to create this new
software in a lab in which, the entertainment companies would have to rent and supply t
he tools used to perform this electrical surgery. Also, time is another factor that has to be
considered. This act may end music piracy but this act may take too long to develop.
In addition, the Internet users would need to buy the new CD’s with the new
software. This act has the possible effect to cause consumers and Internet users to boycott
these products. Therefore, in the end this act could endanger the entertainment industry
by Internet users boycott, but if consumers do not boycott then, the entertainment
industry will have finally found a solution to get rid of music piracy.
Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act
The Digital Media Consumer rights act was passed in 2003 by congress and the
act will place labels on all CD’s’ to verify a product as copyrighted. This act will allow
the entertainment industry to inform the consumer about copyrighted music and how it is
illegal to copy this music without proper permission. The entertainment industry has
begun to place FBI anti-piracy Warnings on All new CD’s that are being produced.
“Proponents say that the bill… requires copy-protected CD’s be clearly
labeled, and would protect consumers from being prosecuted under anti-circumvention
regulations in instances where no copyright law has been broken”. (Medill News Service)
This Act is arguing that if a consumer copied music before these FBI labels were put on
CDs then, the consumer cannot be indicted because they were unaware of the act of
the repercussions downloading free music.
This solution gives people no excuse to download music illegally. The
government is giving the public a chance to redeem themselves before they take the next
step.
However, opponents of this new act say that putting labels on CDs will not stop
Internet Users from downloading music illegally. According to IDG News Service “more
action is needed to keep major copyright-holding companies from monopolizing the
content marketplace”. This bill gives the consumer no excuse to download music
illegally. The bill allows consumers to be reminded of these laws every time they look at
their CDs. Also, the bill will not allow Internet users to continue to download music off
the Internet for free and if the person continues to do so then, the a cease and dissent
letter will be sent out and the last result is prosecution. So this is a negative for the
Internet user/consumer.
Furthermore, “both sides agree that a balance in copyright law is needed. The
conflict is between consumers’ rights and copyright holders rights. The public wants
access to information and technology, while copyright holders want to control the
dissemination of their digital property” (PC World).
Whether or not this solution works for both sides is a matter of opinion. I believe
that Both the Internet user and entertainment industry can be satisfied, but the
government will have to think hard to solve this ongoing problem.