Jalapeno

Couric: You’ve said, quote, “John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business.” Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?

Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie - that, that’s paramount. That’s more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.

Couric: But he’s been in Congress for 26 years. He’s been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more.

Palin: He’s also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he’s been talking about - the need to reform government.

Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you’ve said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?

Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.

Couric: I’m just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.

Palin: I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you.

And this needs watching too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj-on3kfWuE

So it seems that six UK ISPs are now doing the dirty work of the BPI and MPA, and stopping people from downloading files.

There needs to be some sort of balance.

It seems that many people feel entitled to downloading music and movies for free, which is something I disagree with - artists need paying for their work - the terms of this new deal are not consumer friendly.

On the other hand artists feel that they should get paid for their work in perpetuity, which I strongly disagree with also. There are also the media cartels that feel free to stuff the crappy formulaic music down our throats.

If this is so important to the BPI and MPA, then they should be the ones doing the education, and prosecuting downloaders in the courts, but they must have solid proof of infringement.

You also have to understand that big media is scared - suddenly people are free to choose what they listen to and what they watch. For years they have controlled content, releasing and deleting to suit their schedules. Those days are over, but they still want that control.

If I bought a CD 20 years ago, but can no longer listen to it, according to them I am a criminal for downloading it online, even if I can’t buy a replacement as the song is no longer published. This is clearly wrong.

So what can you do?

Don’t use any of the following as your ISP:

BT
Virgin
Orange
Tiscali
BSkyB
Carphone Warehouse

They sold you an internet connection with blazing fast speeds, but just want you to check your email and browse the web whilst they sell you their own media.

Also resist buying music that comes laden with DRM or helps support the big media. Instead try eMusic or similar services that will sell mp3 files with the bulk of the money going to the artist rather than some music managers coke habit.

Don’t buy CDs that is on labels owned by big media - if you like an artist see them in concert instead.

Support organisations working for you:
Open Rights Group

What can big media do? Release the back catalogs online - if a song is not financially viable enough to be published anymore at least make it available for fans - and please do not load it with DRM - it just pisses off consumers who want to be customers and makes them more likely download illegally.

What can artists do? Stop be greedy. Sure, it must be nice to still be paid 50 years after releasing a song, same as it would be nice to be paid 50 years after doing a real job. And now they want 95 years! Anything more than 15 years (which is what pharmaceutical companies get for new drugs) is hard to understand really as it stiffles creativity of other artists.

When a drug is no longer protected more people can benefit from its effects. The company who developed it will generally have made enough profit from their limited monopoly to finance the discovery of future drugs. Indeed, the loss of exclusivity makes finding new profit sources essential! If patents lasted as long as copyright I can imagine a large drug company sitting on its collection of “popular” drugs and feeling no need to innovate.