Reply to post: Re: Compensation?

Musicians sue over 'zero pay' copyright fix

Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

Re: Compensation?

"The fact it is now in two physical locations is not relevant. I bought the right to listen to it (or at least, that's how it should work)."

It's relevant in so far as you are not actually allowed to make a copy of something without a license to do so. The EU's 2001 directive sets out exceptions where this might be permitted. Personal use (of lawfully acquired etc etc) is one of themonly permitted where compensation is also introduced. It doesn't say what this compensation should be.

Would it make more sense to offer a "license to hear it anywhere" or even a "lifetime license"? Undoubtedly yes, and we're moving towards that.

"This won't solve the issue for piracy, as that would still be illegal if I chose to make my "copy" available to others."

Yes, spot on.

"Also, doesn't blank media have a so-called subsidy for the assumed copying that goes on? It used to if I recall."

Not in the UK. It's not a levy-friendly country which is why nobody is calling for one. The Copyright Minister:

"The Government do not believe that British consumers would tolerate private copying levies. They are inefficient, bureaucratic and unfair, and disadvantage people who pay for content."

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019