Tag: piracy

But This Time We Mean It… Welcome To The Ad Tech Time Machine…

Welcome to the Interactive Advertising Time Machine… set the dial for 2010…

“The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) has pledged to work with content producers to make sure that ads don’t inadvertently end up on sites peddling unauthorized copyrighted material.”

That was back in 2010 when NPR aired the story, “Feeding Pirates: When Legit Companies Advertise On Shady Sites.” That’s right, 2010 when filmmaker Ellen Seidler brought the issue to light when she documented the piracy around the release of her indie film “And Then Came Lola.” Highly recommended reading is Ellen’s highly detailed blog, PopUpPirates.

Ok, so maybe not far enough back for you? Set your Interactive Advertising Time Machine to the year 2007...

Here’s  the case of easydownloadcenter.com which found Google caught red handed actually helping the site improve it’s SEO to maximize advertising revenue. This as reported by DailyTech at the time:

“The two men said in sworn statements that Google offered them credit as an easy start to advertise on Google’s search engine, and that the search company also suggested ad keywords such as “bootleg movie download,” “pirated,” and “download harry potter movie.” According to the report, Google received $809,000 for its advertisements.”

And this was Google’s response at the time (arguably the biggest member of the IAB):

“Google declined to comment on the specific clash over its ads, but did say that it is working on ways to screen out ads that violate the company’s policies.

A spokesman for Sony Pictures said, “Discussions with Google have been ongoing for a while, and there’s hope it can result in a mutually satisfactory arrangement whereby Google will not give support to pirate sites.”

Read that again. “Discussions with Google have been ongoing for a while,” that was in 2007 for activity that dates back to 2003.

So please forgive us if we are less than optimistic over the latest so-called “Best Practices” announced by the IAB. This is not a new or unknown issue and what’s worse is that actual knowledge by Google and other members of the IAB dates back at least to 2003, a decade ago.

Think we’re biased? Ok, fair enough but DigiDay calls the latest appeasement “Toothless” and it is a trade publication that reports on internet advertising that is owned by The Economist:

There are also plenty of built-in outs. The networks, for instance, can keep ads running on sites engaging in piracy if those sites have “substantial non-infringing uses.” Also, the agreement lets networks simply remove ads from pages engaging in piracy, while leaving ads running on the rest of the site. The agreement places the onus on the rights holder to notify the networks about pirated content, not requiring the networks to monitor the content themselves. The agreement “cannot, be used in any way as the basis for any legal liability.” The agreement excludes ad servers and ad exchanges.

The agreement may not be not much of an agreement at all.

Yeah, that’s pretty much what we think too. So, what does the creative community have to do to protect itself from the blatant exploitation of its products and labor from internet robber barons? Stay tuned…

YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN READING:

The Ad Network Transparency Conspiracy

by Trichordist Editor

Why are you still fighting for Torrents, If Piracy is Collapsing Due to Legal Alternatives?

Oh, like the drunk who insists they don’t have a drinking problem, perhaps “the lady doth protest too much.”

In the latest offer of highly selective reasoning of what may be a dubious study (er uhm, sorry, make that survey) our favorite (ok, maybe second favorite) site for tech lobby disinformation lets loose with another gem, “Piracy Collapses As Legal Alternatives Do Their Job.” Which, you know, may or may not be true, based on the methodology of the “survey” and the bias of the subjects questioned.

It seems once a year we get one of these “no really, piracy isn’t really happening” survey’s passed off as science. First it was pirates buy 10xs more music than non-pirates, despite there being no factual sales data to support that claim. This is categorically different than say the actual traffic studies that show how BitTorrent is 99% infringing.

And why is it that “illegal” is positioned as a necessary alternative to “legal” in the first place? Why the false binary? There should be no excuse for allowing illegally operating businesses making billions of dollars a year in advertising revenue from the illegal exploitation of artists work to even exist. This has nothing to do with copyright but everything to do with common sense.

Also Norway may not exactly be the best model for the rest of the world. The same people that like to tell us that when they ask college students about piracy, we’re told that “Norwegian students think piracy is OK.” So the outcome of this latest survey should not come as a surprise and it’s always the spin that is most amusing,

So what is responsible for these significant drops in piracy? First of all this effect cannot be put down to anti-piracy campaigns. Only a tiny number of Norwegian file-sharers have been prosecuted in the past five years and only since July 1st has the law been loosened to allow that position to change.

Really now? Not to put to fine a point on it but this is the same tech lobby and freehadi talking points we’ve been hearing for over a decade and not much unlike Kim Dotcom’s “End Of Piracy” hubub. Over and over for more than a decade the same tech lobby and anti-artist talking points are repeated, “piracy isn’t hurting you, it’s helping, get over it.” Not so fast…

All of this despite what the source article states here:

In a report by IFPI, an organization for the international record companies, it also appears that in countries where it is introduced legislation that will block sites like Pirate Bay, the number of users of Pirate Bay has more than halved in 2012. This includes countries such as Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

Perhaps it’s just common sense that a “study of studies” not surprisingly reported that “Yes, Piracy Does Cause Economic Harm.”

if dozens of researchers have tried, all using different methodologies, then their conclusions in the aggregate are the best we’re going to do. Put another way, it will henceforth be very difficult to dislodge Smith and Telang’s conclusion that piracy does economic harm to content creators.

But the proof is really that despite all of these claims, there are 45% fewer professional musicians since 2002. Even the best spin to put on the numbers (by the IFPI no less) at the end of 2012 was a net gain of three tenths of one percent… Even being an optimist and giving the benefit of the doubt that sales may have actually increased by less than a third of one percent is that really any evidence that ad sponsored piracy isn’t continuing to destroy the careers of artists?

And there’s this, courtesy of the New York Times (hint, graph going wrong direction despite decade plus of dubious “survey’s”)…

So the question remains if piracy is collapsing due to legal alternatives why is there such a need to keep defending the ripping off musicians and creators without their consent, and without paying them?

If piracy is irrelevant, it makes little sense to keep fighting for something that has outlived it’s usefulness now that “legal alternatives” are providing the better user experience. Except for just one thing… that little bit about money… who makes it, how, who actually get’s paid (the illegally operating businesses) and of course, who doesn’t get paid (the creators).

Could it be this is the last stand of Free Culture’s Epic Fail? We think so.

[UPDATE] The “collapse” of piracy seems to have been short lived…

Half of surveyed Britons listened to pirated music last month says Bloom.fm

Almost half of a sample of Britons listened to illegally downloaded music last month, according to new survey by music streaming service Bloom.fm.

When asked whether they had listened to music acquired from an illegal online service, from the 976 respondents, 49 per cent admitted that they had, reports Music Ally.

by trichordist

Aiding and Infringing : iPad Music Apps – A New Low

Advertisers need to capture the mobile market. The problem is the functionality of the some of the most frequented websites by the coveted youth demographic is disabled on iDevices (the inability to download content to the idevice). In other words, there is no draw to pirate websites (and to the advertising they serve) if the infringing music is no longer accessible. Worry no more, there’s an APP for that… note the top grossing and most popular music apps for the ipad…

IMG_0001

IMG_0002

IMG_0003

IMG_0004

adsforGAMES

lovebuddy

And uhm… let’s not worry that ads for Adult Services are being targeted to minors…

by Trichordist Editor

Google in Spotlight for Links to Criminal Websites… Again…

Just like groundhog’s day for Google… Here we go… Again…

“On every check we have made, Google’s search engine gave us easy access to illegal goods including websites which offer dangerous drugs without a prescription, counterfeit goods of every description, and infringing copies of movies, music, software and games,” said Attorney General Hood.  “This behavior means that Google is putting consumers at risk and facilitating wrongdoing, all while profiting handsomely from illegal behavior.”

If reading this triggers a sense of deja vu, don’t worry– you’re not crazy.  Less than 2 years ago, in August of 2011, Google agreed to a 500 million dollar settlement with the U.S. Justice Department over online advertisements for illegal Canadian pharmacies.

READ THE FULL POST AT VOX INDIE:
http://voxindie.org/google-links-to-criminal-websites-under-scrutiny

YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN READING:
Google, Advertising, Money and Piracy. A History of Wrongdoing Exposed.

AND:
ADWEEK : “Ad Industry Takes Major Step to Fight Online Piracy”… Again…

by Trichordist Editor

Julian Assange : Google Is Evil in “The New Digital Age”

Very interesting reading as Julian Assange comments on Google, CEO Eric Shchmidt and his book, The New Digital Age. Read on…

“THE New Digital Age” is a startlingly clear and provocative blueprint for technocratic imperialism, from two of its leading witch doctors, Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen, who construct a new idiom for United States global power in the 21st century. This idiom reflects the ever closer union between the State Department and Silicon Valley, as personified by Mr. Schmidt, the executive chairman of Google, and Mr. Cohen, a former adviser to Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton who is now director of Google Ideas.”

He goes onto say,

“This book is a balefully seminal work in which neither author has the language to see, much less to express, the titanic centralizing evil they are constructing….If you want a vision of the future, imagine Washington-backed Google Glasses strapped onto vacant human faces — forever.”

What does this have to do with artists rights you may ask? Well, the way we see it is that Privacy and Anti-Piracy are bound together by the same common bond of respecting the rights of individual citizens. Which is why individual citizens are granted BOTH the right of individual privacy and the right to protection of their labor under Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE AT THE NEW YORK TIMES HERE:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opinion/sunday/the-banality-of-googles-dont-be-evil.html

by Trichordist Editor

ADWEEK : “Ad Industry Takes Major Step to Fight Online Piracy”… Again…

Stop me, oh uh, stop me, if you think you’ve heard this one before…

The advertising industry took a major step Thursday in fighting rogue websites that steal copyrighted material and sell counterfeit goods. To cut off the financial support that keeps rogue sites alive, the nation’s two major ad industry associations recommended agencies and marketers take steps to keep brands’ ads off those sites.

While the debate remains contentious, there has been universal agreement that the key to shutting down rogue websites was to cut off the money that keeps them alive.

Recognizing advertising was the first line of attack, GroupM last year became the first ad shop to adopt a comprehensive anti-piracy policy, compiling last summer an updatable black list of some 2,000 websites that are cut off from ads from blue-chip clients like Ford, AT&T, Unilever and Dell.

READ THE ABOVE FULL ARTICLE HERE AT ADWEEK:
http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/ad-industry-takes-major-step-fight-online-piracy-140014

So the above is from May 3, 2013… and here’s an insightful article below from the advertising trade publication CLICKZ.COM on April 18, 2011… Yes, 2011…

What is the purpose of me bringing this up? To raise awareness and perhaps ask publicly that those involved in this industry become better corporate citizens. If you are running one of those exchanges or networks and feel that it’s only a “transparency” issue, please consider that you are funding not only these websites but organized criminal organizations that run them.

This is not a victimless crime, but instead one that is affecting musicians, programmers, artists, designers – and businesses of all sizes.

As an industry, here are some suggestions of what we can do:

1. Ensure every network that you work with has a no-warez/piracy/torrent policy. Ask around about the networks that do support this. Even if they claim that your ads aren’t going on there, be aware that many of these networks aren’t honest.

2. Put pressure on exchanges that you work with to ensure no network that has this type of inventory is on that exchange. If a few agencies call the exchanges and make it clear they won’t buy media until they are assured these sites are completely off the exchange, then maybe those in charge will consider it a serious issue.

3. Refuse to pay networks that you discover violate this policy and show your advertisements on those sites. Make it clear that you find this behavior not only illegal, but unacceptable for your agency, network, or product.

YOU CAN READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE (FROM 2011) AT CLICKZ:
http://www.clickz.com/clickz/column/2041366/advertising-networks-supporting-piracy

Accountability?
Responsibility?
Transparency?
Anyone?
Hello?

by Trichordist Editor

Permission, Privacy and Piracy : Where Creators and Consumers Meet

It’s amazing how situationally dependent perspectives about the internet appear to be that something as fundamental as consent (aka permission) would be controversial. Much ink has been spilled over a consumers right to privacy in the digital age and that concern now extends beyond the internet to personal privacy fears over the potential misuse of domestic drones.

The irony of course about all the hysteria being discussed about drones (military, commercial or private) is that the greater threat to personal privacy is much more local than an unmanned aircraft at 14,000 feet, or even a home built quad copter. The real threat that will bring the real world to the same persistent observation (and cataloging) of our daily lives will be Google Glass (where is the EFF when you need them?).

Google Glass is a device that records to the cloud a persistent stream of visual and audio data as the user experiences it. Anything, and everything a person would have experienced as a personal and private experience will be recorded, cataloged, geo-tagged, and stored online. Automated face recognition technology will make it less possible to be anonymous in the real world than it currently is in the online world via the use of avatars.

But what does this have to do with piracy? Specifically what does this have to do with content piracy? How are privacy and piracy related? It’s simple, both privacy and piracy revolve around how we view the importance of the individuals right to grant consent. An individual should have the right to grant the specific permissions to access information about us and how that information can be used. Agreed?

This is the same fundamental individual right that governs the protection of a creators work from illegal exploitation. Permission is the cornerstone to a civilized society. Maybe ask these women in Texas about it?

Below is a recent example of how ordinary people, who are also creators got a first hand lesson in “permissionless innovation” aka, “you will be monetized” or “all ur net proceeds now belong to us.”

When Instagram attempted to change it’s terms of service that would allow the company to monetize the work of the individual without the individuals permission, consumers went ballistic. It seems that permission is not such a difficult concept to grasp when people are personally effected. This is why privacy is a much more universal issue, because everyone is effected by it.

It is strangely ironic (or not really) that the companies who were so quick to threaten an “internet blackout” really have no such motivation in detailing how individual personal data is being collected and monetized. Even when that data is from children. So much for being open and transparent.

What’s worse is that Google has been repeatedly caught red handed violating the privacy of not just it’s users but also unsuspecting consumers. Two cases that immediately come to mind are the Safari privacy scandal and resulting settlement and the much broader real world illegal data collection scheme known as Wi-Spy.

So, just like everyone understands the basic fundamental right to privacy is built on the permissions we grant by consent to other citizens, businesses and institutions, individual creators also have the same right to grant permission to who and how their work can be exploited (yes their work, as in labor) for profit and gain.

This is even more important when those doing the profiting are corporations and businesses like Google, various advertising networks and others.

by Trichordist Editor

Artists Rights Watch – Monday Feb 25, 2013

A Weekly Review of Artists Rights, Copyright and Technology News for Creators from Around The Web.

THE NEW YORK TIMES:
* For Music Industry, a Story of Two Googles

…as long as the search side of Google causes friction with the music industry, its other side — the one that is trying to compete with Apple, Amazon and every other digital music service out there — will face some rough patches.

SF GATE:
* New tune at SF MusicTech Summit

The freewheeling era of file sharing, it appears, is slowly coming to a close as artists begin to assert their rights and tech companies consider business alliances with the creators they once flagrantly ignored.

“Here we are, stuck with all these people who want music for free,” said Dave Allen, founding member of Gang of Four and interactive strategist at the branding agency North. “We have to find a way for musicians to make a living.”

SF WEEKLY:
* SF MusicTech: Dead Kennedys’ East Bay Ray Lashes Out at Internet “Pimps”

“There’s opportunists on the Internet that have taken advantage of the artists,” he said, at one point calling them “pimps.” The slim royalties from streaming services, coupled with the proliferation of free MP3s online, meant the music industry was “selling a free ride on a carnival horse, but they’re starving the carnival horse.”

SOLVEIG
* Recap SF Music Tech Summit XII 2013

REUTERS:
* Content economics, part 1: advertising

TV is still the monster, the elephant: for all the talk of cord-cutting, Americans have clearly voted that, given the choice, they’d much rather have cable TV than broadband internet.

And for web-based publishers, the situation is much, much worse even than this chart makes it look.

SEATTLE WEEKLY:
* The Misplaced Zeal of Aaron Swartz

The late activist’s efforts helped put power and public sympathy into the hands of corporations at the expense of artists, musicians, and the people.

Past and present facilitators of digital piracy like Napster, Audiogalaxy, Grokster, Megaupload, and The Pirate Bay are not misunderstood beacons of freedom of speech. They are digital black-market distributors who never asked artists’ permission to feature their works or paid creators a penny, and whose owners took money for themselves via venture-capital funding, subscription fees, or advertising revenue.

DIGITAL MUSIC NEWS:
* The Pirate Bay Is Actually Suing Someone for Trademark Infringement…
* I’m East Bay Ray. And I Think YouTube Has Forced 12,000 Musicians Out of Work…
* Spotify, Pandora & Google Have a New Problem: The New York Times…

MUSIC ALLY:
* Writing or speaking about streaming music screwing artists? Read these articles first
* Harlem Shake tops Billboard Hot 100 chart thanks to YouTube streams

ALL THINGS D:
* Big Music Says Google Isn’t Cracking Down on Pirate Sites, After All

“We have found no evidence that Google’s policy has had a demonstrable impact on demoting sites with large amounts of piracy.”

THE VERGE:
* Spotify pushing labels to lower costs, open up free service to phones

Spotify, the popular music subscription service, is due to meet in the coming weeks with its major counterparts in the record industry to renew their licensing agreements. The Verge has learned that managers at Spotify are expected to ask for substantial price breaks from the music labels as well as the rights to extend its free pricing tier to mobile devices.

VOX INDIE:
* Smokey the Bear Fuels Piracy’s Fire?
* Google Wants to Pass the Buck on Piracy, but Keep Theirs?

Any progress in severing piracy’s blood supply is a certainly a good thing BUT for Google to claim the company is working to “block funding” of pirate sites–while simultaneously profiting from them–seems more than a tad disingenuous. What about blocking access to funding via their AdSense accounts on YouTube and Blogger? Why focus on Visa and Mastercard when one’s own house is in such disarray?

COPYRIGHT ALLIANCE:
* The vine should suffer, not the artist.

THE CYNICAL MUSICIAN:
* The Limits of Copyright
* Copyright Maximalism

The misapplication tends to be especially apparent in the comments section of TCM, where the strangest things are brought up as examples of what would happen if we let up the good fight against copyright. The fact that they strangely failed to materialise over the 300 years or so that copyright had been in existence prior to 2000 (when it tended to be enforced a good deal better) doesn’t throw those who would put forward such theories.

FORBES:
* Congressman Says He’ll Propose Ban On 3D-Printable Gun Magazines

THE TELEGRAPH UK:
* Google looks to Cut Funds to Illegal Sites
* Google’s Copyright War Rages On

In private, the creative industries argue that Google’s supposed favoured status began in Number 10.

David Cameron’s former director of strategy, Steve Hilton, is married to Rachel Whetstone, head of communications at Google. It handed Ms Whetstone a “hotline” to Number 10, opponents argue. Although the couple now live in California, that hotline is “still hot”, says one source. “But it doesn’t matter anyway, because the damage is done.”

The close relationship between Number 10 and the top brass at Google’s Mountain View headquarters has become the framework for all subsequent discussion, critics say. It was emblematic when, nearly a year ago, Downing Street was apparently so in tune with Google’s thinking that the company’s chairman, Eric Schmidt, and the Chancellor, George Osborne, published a joint leader in The Financial Times.

COMPUTER WORLD:
* A Declaration of the Interdependence of Cyberspace

You allege that government has had no role in the Internet, and for this reason it has no claim to the Internet today, but this accusation is founded on nothing more than ignorance and superstition. Government labs and government-funded research programs gave birth to the Internet’s essential technologies, and government policies continue to guide the development of important Internet innovations today.

SALON:
* Stop pretending cyberspace exists – Treating the Internet as a mythical country makes us dumber

If you’re not convinced by now that the very notion of cyberspace is silly, try substituting “fax” or “telephone” or “telegraph” for “cyber” in words and sentences. The results will be comical. “Activists denounced government criminal surveillance policies for colonizing Fax Space.” “Should Telephone Space be commercialized?” Again, the point is not that telecommunications should not be structured and governed in the public interest, but rather that the debate about the public interest is not well served by the Land of Oz metaphor.

SPIEGEL.DE:
* ‘Liquid Democrazy’: Pirate Party Sinks amid Chaos and Bickering

The Pirate Party has been too busy tearing itself apart, with members fighting leaders, who are bickering among themselves and antagonizing the members too. In just the last two days, party leaders for the states of Baden-Württemberg and Brandenburg have stepped down, citing the negative climate. “The atmosphere is so poisonous, there’s hardly any constructive work taking place anymore,” says Udo Vetter

TORRENT FREAK:
* Former File-Sharing Site Admin Fined 6.4 Million Euros
* Google Refuses to Index Huge Streaming Movie Portal Homepage

THE VOICE OF RUSSIA:
* US to crack down on intellectual property theft

The 141-page document refers to China at least 188 times. Russia is mentioned 45 times, and India is also mentioned.Those cases cited mostly involved employees stealing trade secrets on the job rather than cyber-attacks. US corporate victims of the theft included General Motors, Ford, DuPont, Dow Chemical, Motorola, Boeing and Cargill.

TOP COPYRIGHT BLAWGS

by Trichordist Editor

Artists Rights Watch – Monday Feb 11, 2013

A Weekly Recap of Artists Rights, Copyright and Technology News for Creators from Around The Web

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:
* Reappearing on YouTube: Illegal Movie Uploads

The recent problematic uploads may have undercut the rental effort. Movies produced by Disney’s Touchstone Pictures, such as “I Am Number Four” and “Shanghai Noon” are available free on YouTube, even though the studio struck a rental deal through the site.

HYPEBOT:
* Spotify Listener Data Used To Predict Grammy Winners

THE GUARDIAN UK:
* Pirate sites are raking in advertising money from some multinationals

Sites such as Pirate Bay often portray themselves as altruistic, non-profit “freedom fighters”, when the truth is they’re nothing of the sort – their exploitation of artists for their own monetary gain is far worse than the most unscrupulous labels ever were, as they pocket large sums of ad revenue without having to invest it into developing the content they flog.

MUSIC TECH POLICY:
* Pirate Site Isohunt Selling Dead Kennedys Tickets

JAPAN DAILY PRESS:
* Japan’s ‘Operation Decoy File’ to help deter online piracy

THE DEANS LIST:
* Music, Copyright and New Technology in the News From a Creator’s Perspective 02/05/2013

COPYHYPE:
* Friday’s Endnotes – 02/08/13
* Bringing Reality Back to Copyright Debates

Smith and Telang found that of the papers based on empirical data (as opposed to theoretical models), 25 found economic harm from piracy, while only 4 found little or no harm. And for those who are skeptical of non-academic papers: Smith found that 12 peer-reviewed papers published in academic journals found a negative impact from piracy while only 2 did not (and there are legitimate questions concerning the methodology of those 2 outlier papers, some of which are explored in Stan Liebowitz’s 2005 article Economists’ Topsy-Turvy View of Piracy).

Evidence like this, of course, does not tell us where to go from here. But it is amazing how many who join with skeptics of copyright either don’t know about the scholarly record on piracy or don’t care.

DIGITAL MUSIC NEWS:
* The Average TuneCore Artist Now Makes $120 a Year…
* Spotify Executive: “We’re Totally Transparent, and We Definitely Live by That Principle.”
* In Just 3 Years, P2P Usage Has Dropped 35% In France…

FORBES:
* We Need Strong Copyright Laws Now More Than Ever

So why does CEA attack songwriters in this way? Flawed logic. They reason that member companies can make more money if they pay songwriters and other creators less. The truth is that music creators and technology companies need each other. Many innovative and wonderful music-related products are made by CEA members. But many of these products have no purpose without music. The copyright and associated costs—often pennies on the dollar—are deemed harmful. Make no mistake, the companies of the CEA believe in intellectual property. Just ask them about their own intellectual property, such as their patents or trademarks.

Mr. Shapiro’s conclusion is that copyright laws are hurting America. Nothing could be further from the truth.

CNET:
* Next-gen Xbox will require constant net connection

THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER:
* Recording Academy Chief on the Grammys, Pandora and Getting Artists Paid (Q&A)

The problem is, in the transition of all this, we have to remember that it all comes back to the men and women who are creating this wonderful music, and do they have a real ability to make that a full-time vocation as opposed to a part-time hobby?

USWITCH:
* Fines to replace disconnections for internet pirates?

SMART COMPANY:
* Why Telstra plans to slow you down to fight online piracy

Telstra will soon conduct a “limited trial of a range of technical options for better managing broadband internet performance for our customers during peak periods”. One of those options is to “shape”, as the industry euphemism puts it, customers’ access to peer-to-peer (P2P) file distribution networks such as BitTorrent.

PC PRO:
* Anti-piracy letter plans face delay over costs

COMPLEX:
* The 25 Most Important Civil Rights Moments in Music History

BILLBOARD:
* Business Matters: MP3 Stores Harder to Find as Google Search Removal Requests Accumulate

Legitimate MP3 links are becoming harder to find even as the RIAA has sent more than 3,400 removal requests to Google relating to approximately 10 million specific URLs from its search results. Legal stores like Amazon and Myxer, as well as legal streaming sites like YouTube and legal streams and downloads at music blogs, are buried under more illegal MP3 links than when Billboard.biz examined 30 artists in November.

Now, using the same 30 artists as before, it took an average of 11.06 search results to find the first legal search result of any kind and 26.84 search results to find the first legal MP3 store. In November, the results were 7.9 and 11.75, respectively. (Each search was conducted by typing in “MP3” and then the name of the artist. Two spellings were used for Ke$ha and P!nk.)

SONIC SCOOP:
* Input\Output Podcast: David Lowery and the Future of Artists’ Rights

SPIN:
* Music Piracy’s Search Problem: Recording Industry Bringing the Fight to Google

THE DUQUESNE DUKE:
* Pirating or advancing; Debating illegal music downloads – Stealing intellectual property is still a crime

The debate against music piracy has also decreased in popularity. Illegal downloading has become a socially accepted practice and as friends talk about what music they recently downloaded, they forget that they are discussing a crime.

Because of piracy, the music industry is in a downward spiral. And when the time comes for our favorite musicians to pack up their instruments and cancel their tours, we will look at each other, dumbfounded, wondering what could have caused such misfortune to manifest. We will blame the labels. We will blame iTunes. We will demonize Justin Bieber and denounce greed.

But what is really holding the industry back isn’t the greed of the structure. It’s the greed of the people who believe they have the right to all the music they want without paying for it. For the love of music, buy the album and appreciate it for what it is worth.

RAPID TV NEWS:
* Legal content downloading up in France, video and TV series stir piracy

CNN:
* What happens if the price of music falls to zero?

THE HUFFINGTON POST:
* The Internet Is Not Free by Lowell Peterson Executive Director, Writers Guild of America, East

So far, the brightest minds in the business have not figured out how to replicate the revenue streams currently generated by television advertising, theater tickets, and DVD sales, so the market for programs created directly for digital distribution has been pretty thin. Thus, if traditional television and cinema are displaced by the Internet, there will not be enough high-quality content for the ISPs to distribute unless we can figure out how to generate more money to pay people to create it.

TERRIBLE MINDS:
* 25 Thoughts On Book Piracy

MUSIC ALLY:
* Pandora’s active listeners dropped by 1.5m in January

HARPERS:
* Google’s Media Barons

As a journalist and board member of the Authors Guild, I’ve watched in dismay as writers, living and dead, have suffered steep drops in income and copyright control thanks to Google’s — and its smaller rivals’ — logistical support for pirating and repackaging everything that we writers, editors, and publishers hold dear. From the humblest newspaper reporter to the most erudite essayist, we do the work, we invest the money and time, some of us risk our lives — and Google, broadly speaking, reaps the benefits without spending a dime.

FROM THE TRICHORDIST:
* What You Can Do Today to Stop Brand Sponsored Piracy Through Touring Contracts or Sponsor Deals: Artists Helping Artists
* Yes, Piracy Does Cause Economic Harm
* Streaming Services Ranked By “Artist Friendliness”
* Wolves in Sheeps Clothing Criminalizing All Who Oppose Them But for He Who Brings the $unlight: The Troubled, $trange, Fearful, Frightened World of Gary $hapiro, the Diogenese of Anti-Copyright Lobbyists
* Google, Advertising, Money and Piracy. A History of Wrongdoing Exposed.
* Google’s Dehumanized “Safe” Advertising Practices in Gmail: More Laughs From the Leviathan of Mountain View
* Music Streaming Math, Can It All Add Up?
* One Bad Apple: The Complete Checklist on Google’s “Non Anti-Piracy” Anti-Piracy Policies

by Trichordist Editor

Artists Rights Watch – Sunday Feb 3, 2013

Grab the coffee!

Recent Posts:
* Over 50 Major Brands Supporting Music Piracy, It’s Big Business!
* @pepsi and @beyonce @superbowl Ads Supporting Pirate Lyrics Site That Exploits Adele and Skyfall
* Derek Khanna is Wrong: Copyleft Mystery Man’s Misleading Memo Creates its Own Myths…
* It’s Not Whack A Mole if You Own the Mole: New York Times Coverage of Brand Sponsored Piracy
* Zero Dark Thirty, Best Picture Academy Award Nominee, Exploited by AT&T, Verizon, MetroPCS, Nissan, H&R Block, British Airways, Progresso, and more…
* #StopArtistExploitation – Tweet Daily for Artists Rights!
* Underreporting and No Accountability: Another Reason Streaming Royalties are So Small
* Internet Pay To Play: Payola’s Revenge – Guest Post by Robert Rial of Bakelite78

From Around The Web

LA WEEKLY:
* YouTube Stars Fight Back

“I woke up today hoping to make a video, but I went into a call with Machinima this evening and they said that my contract is completely enforceable. I can’t get out of it,” Vacas tells the camera. “They said I am with them for the rest of my life — that I am with them forever.

“If I’m locked down to Machinima for the rest of my life and I’ve got no freedom, then I don’t want to make videos anymore,” he says quietly.

The screen fades to black.

NEW YORK TIMES:
* Playing Whac-a-Mole With Piracy Sites
* As Music Streaming Grows, Royalties Slow to a Trickle

Spotify, Pandora and others like them pay fractions of a cent to record companies and publishers each time a song is played, some portion of which goes to performers and songwriters as royalties. Unlike the royalties from a sale, these payments accrue every time a listener clicks on a song, year after year.

The question dogging the music industry is whether these micropayments can add up to anything substantial.

“No artist will be able to survive to be professionals except those who have a significant live business, and that’s very few,” said Hartwig Masuch, chief executive of BMG Rights Management.

ADLAND:
* Online pirating: sponsored by many brands, and now, one government.

BUSINESS INSIDER:
* How Jobs In The Media Industry Got Demolished In The Last 10 Years [Charts]

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has put together a presentation on the recent history and direction of media jobs. It’s not pretty.

THE LEFT ROOM:
* Piracy, Free Books, etc

DIGITAL BOOK WORLD:
* Does Piracy Hurt Digital Content Sales? Yes

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAPHY:
* Photographers find support in House of Lords in copyright fight

THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER:
* Ray Charles’ Children Win Lawsuit Over Song Rights Termination

BLABBERMOUTH:
* TOOL Frontman Sounds Off On Illegal Downloading, Music Industry And Digital Distribution

“There’s a disconnect between people not buying music and not understanding why [bands] go away. There are people who are like monkeys in a cage just hitting the coke button. They don’t really get that for [musicians and artists] to do these things, they have to fund them. They have to have something to pay the rent.”

VOX INDIE:
* New Spotlight on Piracy Profitmongers

THE ILLUSION OF MORE:
* Think File Sharing is Sticking it to The Man? Really?
* On Being a Luddite

COPYRIGHT AND TECHNOLOGY:
* Yes, Piracy Does Cause Economic Harm

Decisions about business and policy have to be made based on the best information we have available. After a certain point, simply poking holes in studies — particularly those whose results you don’t happen to like — isn’t sufficient.

It may indeed, as the GAO suggested, be impossible to measure the economic effects of piracy with a large amount of accuracy. But if dozens of researchers have tried, all using different methodologies, then their conclusions in the aggregate are the best we’re going to do. Put another way, it will henceforth be very difficult to dislodge Smith and Telang’s conclusion that piracy does economic harm to content creators.

RAPIDTV NEWS:
* LATAM pay-TV operators unite against piracy

CIOL:
* Kamal Haasan fans help curb Vishwaroopam online piracy

BILLBOARD:
* Worldwide Independent Network Announces ‘Independent Manifesto’
* Blink-182’s Mark Hoppus Talks Piracy, Pros and Cons of Digital at MIDEM

“I believe that artists should be paid for their creativity. There’s no other industry where people can come in and take what you create for free and give it away for free and that’s acceptable.”

MUSIC ALLEY:
* U2 manager Paul McGuinness: ‘I don’t want to engage in Google-bashing, but…’
* Irving Azoff sticks it to Pandora and StubHub
* Midem 2013: How the Music Industry Manages Innovation

“We are the last fortress against this YouTube situation, and we are fighting hard on that,” he said. “The problem is the fair price, getting statements and getting all the business plans… The biggest problem to solve the YouTube deal is they want a non-disclosure deal, and we are not allowed by Germany law to do with any partners a non-disclosure [deal]. We have to do it open.”

DIGITAL MUSIC NEWS:
* Pandora Executives Cash Another $3 Million In January…
* Hey Advertisers: You Might Want to Ask VEVO for a Refund…

HYPEBOT:
* Myspace Allegedly Hosting Unlicensed Indie Music, Merlin Prepares Legal Response
* The Most Honest Interview About the Music Industry Ever, Featuring Jacke Conte of Pomplamoose

“YouTube seemed like a really incredible opportunity, but it’s not repeatable. I don’t know how to make it in the music industry. I don’t think anybody really knows how, and I’m unable to repeat what happened to Pomplamoose.”

PLAGIARISM TODAY:
* 4 New-ish Pro-Copyright Sites To Read

THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY:
* Laws of Creation: An Examination of Intellectual Property Rights

INSTITUTE FOR POLICY INNOVATION:
* Copyright and Innovation? No. Copyright IS innovation.

YAHOO:
* New Order’s Peter Hook: Musicians, Journalists Only People Who Don’t Get Paid for Work

Hook expressed astonishment that in the internet economy, consumers act aggrieved if musicians ask to be compensated for their music or if reporters object to having their stories re-purposed by other news organizations without getting credit or cash.

“If you love and respect music, you should pay for it,” Hook said.

COPYRIGHT ALLIANCE:
* Creators and Consumers Should Cut the Strings

TORRENT FREAK:
* Russia Wants To Fine Websites For Poor Copyright Takedowns
* University of Illinois Disconnects Pirating Students, Staffer Asked To Leave
* Pirate Bay Founder Could Be Prosecuted For Hacking “Within a Month”

VARIETY:
* Music retail giant puts tunes online (Amoeba Archives Project)

THE SCOTSMAN:
* New look at copyright key to digital boom

THE CALGARY HERALD:
* Your content is Freely Shared; their Profit is Closely Held

There’s enormous potential in this ‘Your Content, Their Profit’ crowd-sourcing business model, and it’s turned companies like YouTube, Google and Twitter into multi-billion-dollar corporations.

Whether you realize it not, what you post online (your words, your pictures, your pictures of other people, you name it) becomes someone else’s revenue generating opportunity as soon as you post it.

Top social networking sites build into their user agreements and conditions of use the automatic rights to profit from the content that’s posted (or stored or indexed).

JOHN BOSTOCK @ TED CONVERSATIONS:
* Meet the new Boss, Worse than the Old Boss

THE MAUI NEWS:
* Creators v. Consumers : Restating the Obvious

SAD RED EARTH:
* Aaron Swartz and “Hactivision”

by Trichordist Editor