Category Archives: Music & internet radio


PEW Research Center Report: The Impact of the Internet on Institutions in the Future download PDF


When complex business models collapse Clay Shirky on why online video will not generate enough revenue to support the cost base of existing TV companies.

[T]here are two ways to generate a profit: raise revenues above expenses, or cut expenses below revenues … for many media business, that second option is unreachable.


In [complex] systems, there is no way to make things a little bit simpler – the whole edifice becomes a huge, interlocking system not readily amenable to change. Tainter doesn’t regard the sudden decoherence of these societies as either a tragedy or a mistake—”[U]nder a situation of declining marginal returns collapse may be the most appropriate response”, to use his pitiless phrase. Furthermore, even when moderate adjustments could be made, they tend to be resisted, because any simplification discomfits elites.


Morozov “Think Again: the Internet” piece in Foreign Policy

They told us it would usher in a new era of freedom, political activism, and perpetual peace. They were wrong.


Digital power and its discontents. Morozov & Shirky discuss.


An economist on rival goods and public goods Why content is a public good


The “fair use economy” is enormous, growing, and endangered by the relatively tiny entertainment industry

Cory Doctorow


Jeremy Silver of Featured Artists Coalition on piracy, artists the music business and licensing

We want copyright to ensure that artists get paid for their work equitably in equal proportion to the effort involved in its creation, promotion and distribution. We want copyright to ensure that artists are credited by name for the work that they create. And we want copyright to ensure that specific moral and ethical requests made by an artist are respected. So if an artist says: “I don’t want my work used in advertising at all” that is adhered to. But that the default condition of their work is that it is available for use, to be licensed, from day one automatically – without need for negotiation.

The Music Void




Links to 13th June


The week in links
Education resources, open access, copyright, bad research and lobbying, life without newspapers- insight from the1940s, Twitter hype vs the numbers, browser innovation, Digital Britain, life without broadband, French anti-filesharing law overturned.

The week in links

Education resources, open access, copyright, bad research and lobbying, life without newspapers- insight from the1940s, Twitter hype vs the numbers, browser innovation, Digital Britain, life without broadband, French anti-filesharing law overturned.

Continue reading Links to 13th June


Argentine philosophy professor Horacio Potel faces criminal charges and a possible jail sentence for posting  translations of Jaques Derrida’s work to his website for his students. Via Boing Boing and More

New Zealand scraps Controversial ‘3 Strikes’ Anti-Piracy Law which would have led to alleged copyright infringers being disconnected from the internet

A major new report published by the Rowntree Trust on the database state via Open Democracy

guardiantech: Channel 4’s 4ip fund invests in discussion tool Yoosk  ‘famous people. you ask. we connect. they answer’ Based in Warwickshire and Vietnam. About Yoosk . Download pdf

Music Week on Digital Rights Agency Geoff Taylor of the BPI would like government  enforcement against filesharing, but cheaper.

“…the [digital] rights agency is ‘an answer looking for a question’…without a clear remit or responsibility.”

No case for copyright extension on sound recordings. Academics’ letter to Times.

Downloadable font formats for the Web (article): An example of thinking about how the rights of creators can be respected without  resorting to DRM.  Exactly the kind of pragmatic discussion we should be having about other forms of creative work.


Newspapers: Seattle Post-Intelligencer ends printing. Staff cuts, continues as web-only publication

iPod headphones aren´t DRMed, just controlled by a proprietary chip that you have to license

Guardian Tech OFCOM sets out challenge of broadband Britain

More James Boyle and ‘How extending copyright term in sound recordings actually works’ with link to PDF

Guardian Tech Richard Smith. Good summary of James Boyle’s case for The Public Domain.

UK IPO office: since July ISPs issuing 1,000 notifications a week on behalf of copyright holders to P2P users

EU copyright extension: corporate gain, public cost

Academics warn of the dangers and costs of extending copyright term on sound recordings to 70 or 95 years. The European Parliament votes on 23rd March.


“Such an extension, from 50 to 95 years (or perhaps 70 years), will harm Europe’s culture and economy.

The European Parliament is being asked to remove sound recordings from the public domain for another generation, ostensibly in order to benefit performers. In reality, copyright extension will serve the shareholders of four major multinational companies that control the valuable recordings of the 1960s (Universal, Warner, Sony and EMI).

It is not surprising that many performers’ organisations and collecting societies support the Proposed Directive. They do not have to carry the costs – which are likely to exceed EURO 1 billion to the general public …. Many performers also do not appear to understand that the proposal would lead to a redistribution of income from living to dead artists.

If Europe wishes to keep its ability to innovate, it must not lock in the current industry structure at a moment of great technological change, it must not inhibit digital creators and archives in the exploration of music – music which has been paid for once already, during the existing term!

The public will not be fooled. If copyright law, cynically, departs from its purpose, piracy becomes an easy option.”

Download press release PDF 

Via Open Rights Group 

Studies of copyright term and an open letter to David Lammy, Minister for Intellectual Property (and co- presenter of the UK Digital Rights Agency proposal.)

“ it is hard to discern a compelling ‘moral’ case for a proposal whose prime effect is to benefit major label shareholders and a few, already highly successful, artists while imposing significantly greater costs on new creators, the general listening public and the custodians of our cultural heritage.”

Bournemouth University Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management