Advertisement

Music Week
Login Form

User login:

Forgotten Password

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Main Page Content:

Pirate Party founder meets fiery reception

10:09 | Monday October 19, 2009

The Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge met with a fiery reception yesterday as he kick-started In The City 2009 by outlining his party’s views on the copyright debate.

Falkvinge, appearing as part of ITC’s P2P panel alongside MMF chief executive John Webster, started by relating the history of copyright, arguing that it had been used to stifle creativity and free speech from the start.

“The creativity will die argument [that copyright protects creators’ work] was as bogus then as it is now,” he concluded.

He then set out his party’s defining views. They are:

· Postal anonymity for electronic communication

· “Messenger immunity”

· Freedom to communicate

· The right to communicate in private

· The right to create without a permit (e.g. for fans to be able to make their own remixes of copyright work)

BASCA CEO Patrick Rackow then pressed Falkvinge for his party’s specific views on copyright.

The Pirate Party founder set out six points:

·To outlaw internet disconnection in EU member states

· Reduce copyright to commercial use only

· Reduce copyright to five years from date of publication

· Limit DRM

· Allow remixes and rehashes to encourage mash up culture

· Keep the right of attribution, so artists are identified for their work

However, he found little support among the audience. Rackow explained that reducing copyright to five years would effectively kill off professional concert composers, who earn money from their work slowly over a long period of time, while The Register executive editor Andrew Orlowski criticised Falkvinge’s “conservative, reactionary” one-issue politics.

One audience member was more succinct. “I am taking this personally. So fuck you,” he said, to some applause. “You talked about the middle ages but if this were the middle ages I would burn you at the stake.”

The panel also explored the idea of compulsory licensing [of digital music], which Webster said the MMF supports “should other solutions fail”. Orlowski, however, dismissd the idea. “It has to be voluntary,” he explained. “It could work in North Korea but it’s not going to work here.”

Other panels yesterday included Digital Licensing, How Do We Build A Future?, God! Show Me Magic The Story Of Creation Records and The Seldom Seen Kid, examining the story of Paul Curry, who created popular music search site Music Search Plus.

The day ended with Drowned in Sound editor Sean Adams interviewing The Hype Machine creator Anthony Volodkin, before the live showcases kicked off in earnest, with local band Egyptian Hip Hop proving one of the main draws.


... Follow music week at in the city via twitter: @musicweeknews

Readers' comments

  • Eliot Porter 19 October, 2009

    Falkvinge may be perceived as a heretic, but his thoughts are far more in tune with the song-buying populace than those running the music industry. Customers are imploring the industry to listen to reason, but we're being ignored. If you can't give us what we want (and the majority of us are NOT pirates, and do NOT download music illegally), then you'll get nothing.

  • K Kam 19 October, 2009

    a license for media on the web IS entirely necessary IMO. Between that and working on a solution with the ISPs, there is no other way to embrace this new technology. Petition below: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/compulsary_worldwide_digital_mus/index.html

  • Russell Cottier 19 October, 2009

    Right to privacy and freedom from compulsory DRM are great ideas but has it really become OK to steal intellectual property? I'll bet if Rick Falkvinge came up with the next flugelbinder or had a No.1 album then five years would not seem long enough protection for those intellectual properties. Let's be sensible about the future of the industry and protect the creatives whilst giving the option to release material into the public domain.

  • Cpt. J. Sparrow 21 October, 2009

    "Stealing" intellectual property? Lol. Stealing means taking something that isn't yours and thereby depriving its rightful owner of it. Nobody loses their MP3 when I download it, they will still have it, therefore it ain't stealing. Sorry.

Bookmark and Share

Comment on this story

Post your comment

You must fill in all fields marked *

19 October, 2009

 

Main site navigation:
Secondary site navigation:
Main site navigation end
-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement

-
 
-
Abacus E-media
Abacus e-Media
St. Andrews Court
St. Michaels Road
Portsmouth
PO1 2JH
-

Advertisement