backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 52 comment(s) - last by Macelind.. on Jan 31 at 1:23 PM

Advocacy is growing in the U.S.'s northern neighbor to make sharing legal

In the U.S., suggesting that legislation be past to legalize music sharing is likely a ticket to getting laughed out of town. The U.S.'s northern neighbor, Canada, is used to looking at things a bit differently.  Canada often breaks with its neighbor and tradition in terms of social policy and other issues.

Canada is now experiencing an intriguing grassroots movements among its music artists to legalize music downloading.  The Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC), a songwriters guild which features such artists as Joni Mitchell, Jean-Pierre Ferland, David Clayton-Thomas, Marc Hamilton, and Haydaine Neale, just released a proposal that may turn a few heads in the international music community.

The group proposed that the Canadian government legalize file sharing, while enacting a flat fee of $5 per home Internet connection to provide royalties to artists.  The SAC estimates that the legal music market in Canada amounts to about $2.13 million CDN in revenue, while being dwarfed by illegal downloading.  About 22% of Canada's population downloaded music last year according to a research study last year representing about 7.5 million active downloaders.  If the flat fee was imposed, this could increase music revenues to almost $37 million CDN.

While many of the details about how the royalties would be distributed remain to be seen, the SAC's efforts represent a landmark effort by musicians to make their music available to the public for a reasonable rate.  The SAC states that, "Canada has given the world some of the greatest music ever produced. We believe that implementing a fair way of compensating Canada’s music creators for the online sharing of their music will usher in a new Golden Age of creativity."

On its site, an online petition that can be completed by Canadian citizens, which will help bring the issue before Canada's Parliament.

While Canada may be experiencing an artist-driven movement towards legal file sharing, here in the U.S. such ideas are met with a mix of trepidation and enthusiasm.  Some artists like Trent Reznor and Radiohead are strong advocates of working out a more fair system that allows users to distribute music, while providing artists with some compensation.  Other artists like former Kiss member Gene Simmons laugh off such ideas and say that college students who download music should lose their "houses and cars".



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Quid pro quo
By Chris Peredun on 1/29/2008 10:04:37 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
"Canada has given the world some of the greatest music ever produced."

Maybe so, but Canada also gave the world Celine Dion.




RE: Quid pro quo
By wordsworm on 1/29/2008 10:14:31 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Maybe so, but Canada also gave the world Celine Dion.


It's revenge for Britney Spears.


RE: Quid pro quo
By BruceLeet on 1/29/2008 1:51:46 PM , Rating: 2
We gave Celine's Vocals for the nude scene in Titanic, not a bad trade (for us Canadians)

Quid Pro Quo


RE: Quid pro quo
By wordsworm on 1/29/2008 10:51:53 PM , Rating: 2
It could be worse. We could've given them Rita MacNeil. (Dear neighbors to the South: don't look for photographs. Wikipedia is safe: no photos). We also punished the US with Brian Adams.

The only truly great musical talent out of Canada is Weird Al as far as I can tell. Can you think of another musician that wrote a song about computers? "All about the Pentium!" And who can forget that he made "Gangsta's Paradise" better with "Amish Paradise"?


RE: Quid pro quo
By Gul Westfale on 1/29/2008 11:02:51 PM , Rating: 2
no matter how you put it, i'm NOT paying $5 for avril lavigne and celine dion. no sir.


RE: Quid pro quo
By wordsworm on 1/30/2008 6:05:20 AM , Rating: 2
That's not how it would work anyways. Those two artists have talent, regardless of whether or not either of us can stomach them. Trust me, that would go against Canadian government policy. The way it would work, more likely, is the money would go to whomever was spewing patriotic garbage.


RE: Quid pro quo
By killerroach on 1/30/2008 10:36:16 AM , Rating: 2
Except that Weird Al is from southern California. Sorry.


RE: Quid pro quo
By wordsworm on 1/30/2008 12:11:14 PM , Rating: 2
Damn... you're right. Then what talent are they talking about? Ok... we do have Jeff Healey, but he stopped making albums when he started doing some (albeit great) jazz. Someone help me find some patriotism please!


RE: Quid pro quo
By siberus on 1/29/2008 12:02:28 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty sure we already apologized for it as well.


RE: Quid pro quo
By VitalyTheUnknown on 1/29/2008 1:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
Can anyone enlighten me why it's not the first time I hear from Americans jokes towards her.
Here in Europe she is regarded as one of the most beautiful voices ever.
People have different tastes in music but her songs like

Celine Dion - The Power Of Love
Celine Dion- Because You Loved Me

Were very popular, and still today.
And I don't think anyone in their mind would even compare her to Britney Spears.


RE: Quid pro quo
By JakLee on 1/29/2008 2:07:29 PM , Rating: 2
Because here in the states we like to make fun of people who are popular. She may have a beautiful voice but I am tone deaf & don't really notice. However anyone that gets popular fast is often relegated to fad status regardless of talent.... and of course there is the whole Titanic thing....
:)


RE: Quid pro quo
By sdifox on 1/29/2008 2:54:17 PM , Rating: 2
fast??? She has been in the music business forever. She worked damn hard to get where she is. You can say you don't like her music, but you have to respect her dedication. She is not a fad.


RE: Quid pro quo
By rcc on 1/30/2008 11:36:02 AM , Rating: 2
It's the kid mentality here in the states, and elsewhere. Anything that has understandable lyrics and a melody is old hat, and deserves to be made fun of. It's also generational, as they get older most of them will change their, umm, tunes.

When you've been around long enough to watch a couple, few generations pass, it's actually quite entertaining.

I still get a kick out of the fact that music academia has lumped rap in the same category as gregorian chant. And didn't that just piss off a bunch of people. : )


RE: Quid pro quo
By Ringold on 1/29/2008 5:13:08 PM , Rating: 3
Christina Aguilera has a killer voice, too. Doesn't mean American's have to like her.

Besides, that setup with her husband was, frankly, somewhat creepy.


RE: Quid pro quo
By GTVic on 1/29/2008 5:39:22 PM , Rating: 2
I think partially it is over exposure for her and her songs. When someone or a song is popular, their songs get overplayed and eventually many people find that irritating.

Also, with Celine Dion, she has a very eccentric (or maybe excessive) personality. She says that is her personality but if I was around all those winks, high fives, thumbs ups and strange facial expressions all day they would drive me nuts.

In short I think the whole package is over done and over exposed and that is why there is the backlash.


RE: Quid pro quo
By VitalyTheUnknown on 1/29/2008 7:06:17 PM , Rating: 2
After reading your reply I have stumbled upon this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQrcNujVTPA

At least now I understand what could possibly irritate people and what you meant by saying that she is eccentric personality, but for me she's just having fun.


RE: Quid pro quo
By winterspan on 1/29/2008 9:48:09 PM , Rating: 2
I think alot of people get annoyed with nearly any very popular actress/singer/celebrity because of the insane level of exposure/media attention/gossip/etc thats goes on in America about Hollywood & the entertainment industry. It's grotesque.

That said, there are MANY who will try to ridicule anyone and everyone who is famous and successful, regardless of the person in question (not pointing fingers). Apparently, it is much easier to just speak negatively about everyone instead of actually contributing something meaningful. I think it makes them feel better about their own inadequacies and mundane existence.


RE: Quid pro quo
By Zelvek on 1/29/2008 5:59:02 PM , Rating: 2
She is part of a larger problem...

...Quebec


RE: Quid pro quo
By Samus on 1/31/2008 1:10:19 AM , Rating: 2
All that matters in the end is Jim Carrey and Rush. lol.


Well, I'm in!
By anotherdude on 1/29/2008 10:08:21 AM , Rating: 3
But from EVERY home with an Internet connection? Sounds good to me, since I would be a heavy user, but I suspect a lot of people would be unhappy with giving $5 a month if they are not going to DL. I do like the general concept.

I already pay Rhapsody $15 a month.

Throw movies and software into the deal and I'm in for sure. How will the proposed system deal with that I wonder?




RE: Well, I'm in!
By Hieyeck on 1/29/2008 10:23:28 AM , Rating: 1
QFT. A flat fee to cover intellectual property would be the way to go. However, I'd do more of a flex fee, where it's based on your downstream. People with more bandwidth are more likely to download more stuff, so maybe $1-$1.50 per megabit? On top of that, it's PURE profit, for the companies, since it'll still those music and movie files will still be downloaded from outside/3rd party sources. I'm not against paying for movies, but I don't like paying middlemen and especially when there are more effective means to obtain something. Why take a bus to wherever the hell to buy/rent a movie when I can do it from my own home. It's why netflix works - a few clicks and bang, you have movie after movie shipped to your doorstep.