This is the debate that took place in the group not the law of the SCD Facebook.
I put it here to clear the panel discussion.
NOT A LAW SCD : I opened a debate to expose Denisse clearly and distinctly the position of the SCD to ours.
What plants who have Denisse group arguments is that, first, with the SCD a society of artists specifies the clauses that promote you affect all of us (the whole society), in particular benefit you. And these provisions are backed by the Government of Chile, without there being any possibility of reversal. This means that the Chilean government sponsored a bill with clear social biases, committing an act as undemocratic and discriminatory, it was agreed without a counterpart to that position. And a misleading measure since it opened a panel discussion with such an agreement already made. This table has no sense. In addition to the Government sent the Senate a modified LPI (Intellectual Property Law) by noting that any refinements to be made, should be based on that agreement.
Now the bottom line is this:
The SCD promotes rights are ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (©), ie people who copy, disseminate, rent or profit from etc. works under this license will be penalized. And heavily penalized (provides for fines of up to 1000 UTM, ie 37 Million), this is a search, of course, stop piracy.
However, this license with all rights reserved is bivalent, that is, finally you are or are not "Pirata" (under the slogan of profit), it makes no distinction between "people who only copy", "broadcast only" (or both) and people who profit from these (pirates, people who sell discs in the gutter). You
same Denisse you refer to only penalize the acts of pirates who sell such works. At this point we fully agree.
clutchless the premise that seems logical is ultimately irrational, because under this License ALL who buy works with copyright (©) are, nominally in the law, pirates of ditches.
Although I have a record of Saiko (original discography as I have) without even back it up to my PC hard drive and share the DSS intends to charge ISP (Internet providers, VTR and all these companies, that shit have to do them!) A percentage by which the SCD called "copyright infringements." Moreover, this LPI one thing that is prohibited to transfer the original disc to iPod or MP3 or whatever you use to listen to music. I want to be adamant that I am not advocating any interest of the ISP, my relationship with it is commercial (I customer service they sold me.)
However it turns out a pirate X can copy discs without even Internet!, Just an original CD, computer with a burner and blank CDs.
This not to say that pirates have not to download albums and then sell, that we repudiate all. This is the main argument of the SCD, but as copyright (©) do not distinguish between pirated, backup, copy, disseminate, etc. Ie the SCD want to penalize, what I call, all event.
Now it may happen that I support, copy, disseminate, provide a record of Denisse (Weed) non-profit one, but she was a member of the SCD is not interested at all my intentions: She just does not want do any of that with your disk (Penalize "any event") because everything is inside of that record is theirs, not mine but bought it, it's yours and nobody else; intellectual property. (Ya OK! Is well you created it is yours).
Now two things: 1 I as a customer of an ISP, I have because they have economic considerations (but moral) with artists members of the SCD as Denise, I like them, I have economic considerations toward myself ( I like them as consumer SCD). We are saying something very important here and we should explain: The interest that both defend (Denisse and I / SCD and people) are more or less profit, plain silver, lucas, money. I want to spend money as little as possible and they charge for their work as much money as possible, no drama here. We all must pay bills and eat.
The problem is that the SCD involves my ISP company in the matter and they want to charge. Now these suppliers, like all private, you're looking to minimize costs (privatizing the profit) and as such, any loss externalize (socialize the debts). This could mean that prices paid services increase.
Creative Commons as an alternative to copyright.
now is that there is a kind of license that is bivalent and that gets us to sack pirates ditch, called Creative Commons. This type of license is multivalent, ie take many values, diversifying thus the license types that artists nominating their works. One of them allows for example, copy (transfer to my iPod for example) or broadcast a work, but not profit from it. It is multimedia, as it discriminates between different artistic fields and formats.
Recall now that Denise told us not to attempt to punish pirates, would not it be fair that she told us "OK, you can copy, backup, provide and extend my record, but I sold that copy in the gutter OK? ". Us through this group together we are saying a resounding "yes! Of course if we are not criminals do not profit with your work! " but she still disagrees with us, it reflects and says "... to be allowed to copy, disseminate, pay etc. my album if I can charge them for it. Or just do not let them do anything with the record. "
What she seeks are not fans (so far) of her music, she looks in the first consumers to buy their album and become fans to buy all their albums. Then it to promote their music does just, discos, concerts, posters, give interviews, take photos, spend their music on the radio (but this radio has to pay to spend their songs) in nightclubs, at the airport waiting room, the hospital and everywhere where you hear his music is promoted, it is broadcast. And who would want to charge?: In the ISP.
In this sense one of the central arguments of the SCD (And the same Denisse mouth) is that we do not realize that corporations or defend all of us are just a few capitalists who defend the ISP (WTF? ) But as we said, Creative Commons is an excellent alternative to Copyright to spice up the faults and not penalize people for spending our CD to an iPod or any portable player nonprofit, but the essence of the SCD is the Bivalent Copyright, all rights are reserved and will not be any distinction between those who profit and those without.
But the debate has unfair and undemocratic this option, alternative and more content-rich side, as the government and the DSS have made an agreement in terms bivalent, ie copyright.
Finally, be against the SCD in any case means being against Chilean artists members of that particular society, much less is our intention as a group boycott of those artists, it's the support as such. What is strongly refuting the form and substance of what it dealt with the issue of Intellectual Property. Aside units. together with the Government this position as or more valid arguments than the SCD.
DENISSE Malebrán :
Well, things did not start as you start listing.
First, the government through an initiative that sought to amend the existing copyright law, and consists of 4 ministries (finance, economics, culture and education) create instructions which we were not consulted or take us account in our interests, particularly in such vital issues as the autonomy of the management company that regulates and collects the amounts generated by copyright or related rights (interpretation) of each artist associated.
to start I also want to clarify that when SCD refer to are actually talking about the UNA, National Union of artists, it is not only us (musicians) who are affected, with each branch art legal representation against negotiating table and joined in the same order as ONE. That
to clarify this smear campaign against not using national music, when it would be like not to eat Chilean art, since we are all united in this cause.
harmful After hearing about the procedder interrunpían rules of our society today, we begin to ask that we take into consideration before submission to the cameras and the vote, trying to different approaches and show that the social significance of our exercise went beyond making money, and without that regular collection Tennes operating legally, it would not make or rooms SCD or SCD stamps, or health, or welfare and so on. ..
I'll explain because most of these days arguementos read appreciations high point in selling CD for example and the SCD is a pioneer in that sense to release albums independently at prices ranging from 2500 pesos.
last longer and the Chamber of Deputies to be favorable to our interests that party's vote, began working on the High and was due mainly to get together U.S. Senators who showed ignorance on the subject and TOTALLY influeenciados by the vision of digital rights, whether to be honest, from the advisor to the Minister to some Senators Officers are publicly militants CC doctrine.
A Senator in particular, we expressed the conviction that this was already fixed for some time represented by the ISP and that we should be bolder in front of the steps coming.
As we did not feel heard by the executive began to organize movements and thus call the attention of the Government, which had results published from a recunión with Misnitro Vieragallo and where they promised Urrutia to get the information directly affecting the functioning of our organization, leaving as the full record will be understood.
Now, I do not see the deal quiet until it apparently so inform the rest of the squad, which similarly held meetings with politicians and ministers ...
I think we have rights to fight for what we believe and while I find your position very respectable DC, do not share.
NOT think they have to pay for broadband users business, real and hidden, which is the lowering of released, protected content, but it is undeniable that his business is the transfer of information and sometimes that information is copyrighted.
That does not mean that we are in favor of a fee or to believe that the charge made by ISP to all those who contract their services, Shall have a credores COMPENSATION for all of literature, film, music, scientific research, software, theater, photography, talks ETCE. ought to be passed on to consumers.
believe that they are responsible, but we have no fixed idea as they should set the reward for those affected. No tax for all logic would seem to me, but nobody seems to believe that is possible.
Except the government not to adopt this measure so unpopular if he had no tools to freeze prices or set this as the maximum rates are allowed.
Though you know I put an example:
When VTR is legally required to pay copyright, not a single dollar went up NI account all those who hire Cable. Do not see why it could not be applied to the same form.
I still ...
do not know what types of Digital Rights intend getting into issues that do not affect your pocket throughout the country where your business is NOT related to music.
Examples like giving up I seem vaiosísimos Patrico and contribute to the diversity that enriches us everyone, but that does not mean that everyone has to obey to that format, because, as explained by, due to a range of age (YOUNG .. although I offended with viejotes of 30)
and even type marketable music right through the net and not everything is possible to achieve that.
Think that this business is NOT SELL RECORDS! the bulk of our revenues as the private porviene SCD, osea, super, clinics (hospitals Cristian NOT!) and market presence generalozado with music in their services. It also provides that only 6% of the total market pays royalties to pay fees which are quite reasonable compared with water, electricity, gas etc ...
Now, leaving aside the results of the supposed closing of this table (which I have not so clear to see how things are), and forgetting the actual recovery to ISP and Canon, because they insist on replacing signs that are related to our business that is neither internet nor the computer input and IF radio, TV, advertising and events.
I live concerts live, but YO! how many more?
And the musicians who are just songwriters and performers do not have to forget about their business because of an overnight someone had the idea that he disliked the copyrights?
I can tell with honestly (I'd love to find interviews of years ago ... when I had nothing to do with this post) I think and I always thought that I do not care if people like my music you got it legally, then I know tradiocnal a CD is 10% of minimum income. It is an ultra discourse used, but the problem here seems not to be there ... and it is a mentality completely free of course irritating when you do not get bored of doing charity! (There will be more professional so generous and supportive to us??)
independent management As my business like I want to take my music and if I want to live and play for free if I get free the songs on the Internet to be downloaded, but I have also right to want people who can do it, pay for the disc. And notice that today sell more than before ... because it will be?? Because
cost half my records when I was in a multinational, and even in my final stage as part of an independent label, just raided and charged 10,000 per disc! to win the 50% owners of the label (this is separate issue ... but there are still the same chantas of 90 by independent labels, disguised ... because they have the mentality of multinational glues)
Now I sell them in Show, at the offices of Black Sheep and depending on the timing and offers that excite, will dessde 3,500 to 5,000 pesos, with art and photos and all so original, thanks to support from the Foundation of the music ... guess what ... the SCD! It runs all the same, Do not think that because I am no more! hahaha there is a very interesting catalog that can be reviewed.
think that would bother to treat us as thieves? Here are cat hidden and I find that claim getting into a functional system with perfect relationships with users of conventions.
On the examples you give, the exceptions are based ... and how dangerous is happening here is that ANYONE will be exempt from paying on the grounds that there is no profit.
already today is illegal to copy CDs to support or carry more comfortably in another system, but who is going to bring prison for that?
We have no secret service police prosecute those who make copies of records to be shared, and we are not interested. There
only speak for myself, because it lowers tab I imagine DVD sales should greatly affect the credores cinematográficso the indiscriminate copying of movies, which often do not reach or are already being extrenar and copied.
Of course, anyone who profits from the work of others is reprehensible in all areas and is also our apprehension that the broadband providers, who know that their capacity is not entirely directed to download a higher percentage to other functions.
not know what else is left out ...
I repeat that like all sectors had the opportunity to point out the difficulties they had indications for our interests, but there was no intention or bad faith to make a secret pact, only protect our interests.
There is nothing signed yet ... at least not inviting me? Jajaja
.-.-.
0 comments:
Post a Comment