Msg#: 4390683 posted 5:20 pm on Nov 25, 2011 (gmt 0)
A common sense approach, my opinion. Having ISPs become "policemen" for content is an inappropriate and crazy wish, fraught with too many dangers of error or malice. Copyright holders, generally, are responsible for protecting their content, backed by law(s) with legislated punishments attached.
Msg#: 4390683 posted 11:35 pm on Nov 26, 2011 (gmt 0)
The people that made the music have the choice.
...and you've never made a choice thinking you knew all the options available to you and then later determined that all those available options were the least desirable? I could think of a few things in my own life that would work as a great analogy that most people could relate to. That's merely justification without any consideration of any kind which doesn't work if you're trying to be objective.
How do musicians know what their options are? They aren't inherently also web designers, web developers, graphic designers and they might not even use computers to begin with much less be aware of the technical terms. Add to the fact that everyone keeps saying Google is favoring big businesses for search results what are the chances that an uninformed artist will find what they're really looking for or even have an idea of what to look for?
Msg#: 4390683 posted 3:18 am on Nov 27, 2011 (gmt 0)
Let's not get too far from the topic with asides into the who and how to copyright side. That's different topic.
The last thing the internet needs is for civilians (ISPs) to be turned into unvetted censor police by third parties. The EU court saw that might not be a good idea... and here's hoping the rest of the world sees it the same way.