Washingtonpost.com: Live Online

Join Fast Forward columnist Rob Pegoraro for a discussion of copyright protection in the digital era. As Rob wrote in a recent column As Copyright Gets a Starring Role, We're Cast as the Villains (Post, March 31), Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) has introduced the "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act," a controversial bill supported by the entertainment industry that "would require things that can retrieve, copy or display copyrighted digital works -- a computer, MP3 jukebox, CD player, TV, cell phone, photo-editing program, operating system, seemingly anything with a chip or code in it -- to obey copy-protection rules encoded in these movies, music, pictures and books."

Such legislation, if enacted, would several restrict the fair-use rights of consumers, "your ability to back up a record or put together your own music collection would be at the sufferance of copyright owners alone."

What do you think of the entertainment industry's efforts?

Below is the transcript.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

Rob Pegoraro: Good afternoon! We are gathered here today to talk about digital copyright--what could be a dull topic, but which has instead been in the news a lot these days. The ongoing negotiations between the entertainment industry and hardware manufacturers over what sort of copy controls to put in future TVs, stereos and computers will determine what sort of ability you might have to time-shift a TV show or make your own mix CD. And now, as I wrote two Sundays ago, the entertainment industry is also lobbying for Congress to pass a bill that would require all hardware and software to support whatever copy-protection technology is agreed on.

That's a big goal, and there's a lot to talk about there. I've also got a few questions about yesterday's column about an alternative to Microsoft Office. And I've only got an hour to get to 'em all. So let's go to the first question...

Alexandria, Va.: Rob, back around Xmas you wrote about CD makers putting blocks on their products to keep users from copying them. Have you seen many CD manufacturers employing this blocking device?

Rob Pegoraro: So far, I have only heard of three U.S. releases that definitely use a copy-protection technology (others have been reported but not confirmed). One's the Charley Pride CD that an independent label put out last summer. The other two are from Universal Music Group--the "More Fast and Furious" CD I wrote about in December, plus a new CD by somebody called Pretty Willie.

Bowie, Md.: About various technology laws --

How serious a problem is it becoming generally that lawyers, judges, politicians, etc., are not technologically oriented people?

My company has a case in federal court now in which we're trying to explain how our current issue isn't the same one that another court decided two years ago. My wife's company is being sued for patent violation over a patent that was issued another company for an application that is a trivial variation on her company's patent.

Has our society reached the point where our laws are just not capable of keeping up with our technology?

Rob Pegoraro: This is a question that I can't really answer, but it's worth raising. I can tell you that some legislators (say, former Neb. Sen. James Exon) appear to have no grasp of technology whatsoever, and others (Sens. Leahy and Cantwell, Virginia's Rep. Rich Boucher) have gone out of their way to talk about some of these technology-policy controversies, often in ways that I agree with.

Alexandria, Va.: How is the legislation, new technology, etc. going to affect homemade mix-CD's?

Currently , I use a low-tech cassette recorder on the stereo system to make mix tapes, which works very nicely. I can keep my orginal CD's safely at home and not worry about them getting stolen or lost. Plus, I can group songs I like into catagories (fast songs for jogging/treadmill, songs to sing along with, songs for bad traffic jams)

However, I can foresee a time when I'll have to burn CD's, if only because new cars are more and more likely to have CD players. Are the manufacturers going to tell me Thou Shalt Not Mix Jimmy Buffet with the Kingston Trio?

Rob Pegoraro: The Hollings bill would let them do that--they could add a watermark or some other gimmick to a CD, and your next computer or CD recorder would have to obey its instructions. You could keep your old hardware around until it broke--after that, your only "rights" would be those the record label felt you should have.

St Louis, Mo.: Hi Rob. Unfortunately we live in a world where competition is always on everyones mind, included myself. Once you put a chip or anything on the product to keep the ownership clear, there will be someone outthere selling something to re-mark or erase those chip from the product. Unfortunately people are not honest at all and we feel like we have to keep up with everyone else to do the same thing. Thanks for listening. - Carlos

Rob Pegoraro: This is what has the computer industry concerned--there are a few other countries in the world known to manufacture computer hardware, and it's unlikely that all of these countries would agree to any Hollings-style legislation.

Riverdale, Md.: Copy right legislation may pass but you will never be able to stop hackers and other computer guru's from crack encryption codes. Also if I buy a CD why should have to pay to have the MP3 version if I choose to download it on to my CPU. The record companies would to grab every penny they can from the consumer. I refuse to buy any CD or other product which I can not make a copy of. I don't feel sorry for the record company and their shrinking profits bottom line is if I purchase on item for home use it is my business what I do with that item which it is in my ownership. I don't won't Congress or the entainment industry tell me what I can and can't do with a product that I own. If I go out and buy a Porshe I don't want the automobile manufacturing using technology to limit my speed to 55 mph when the car can is capable of reach speeds of over 100mph. Once I buy a product I should be able to do what ever I please with that product.

Rob Pegoraro: Fair enough. One question, though: Have you bought DVDs? DVDs incorporate some copy protection of their own, but--by virtue of their low price, their high quality and the extras you get--most people seem to have accepted that tradeoff. (One possibly relevant factor: until last year, nobody could buy any hardware to make their own DVDs at all.)

Accokeek, Md.: The MPAA is (already) holding hostage the digital cable set-top box market (the proposed OpenCable standard for addressible digital cable set-top boxes sold at retail and leased by cable companies) over content protection issues (flying in the face of an existing FCC mandate to the cable industry); in what way does the Hollings bill --not -- extend this to the rest of consumer electronics (especially the personal computer subindustry)? From what I have seen about this bill, it certainly does increase the number of hostages (not to mention rendering archival/timeshifting moot).

Rob Pegoraro: This is a related issue that I didn't have the room to get into. The question here is how a set-top box for HDTV over cable would work, and what it would let you, the consumer, do. The cable industry is supposed to agree on a standard, so that you or I could just *buy* a cable box instead of paying rent on one in perpetuity--but the consumer-electronics industry doesn't like the design that the cable folks have put forth, and in particular the way it supports a lot of copy-protectoin features that consumers may not want.

Alexandria, Va.: What are the roots of the current Internet cultural belief that stealing via peer-to-peer networking is OK? Why are the efforts of copyright owners to protect themselve from this threat so offensive to the Internet industry, including you (as judged by your editorial), while, at the same time, the efforts by hackers and tech companies to make protected content available (e.g., hard drives that rip MP3 files from CDs in Redbook format) for free are not similar to the same scrutiny?

Rob Pegoraro: I don't know that there is a widespread belief that stealing is OK, although I do know many people who do believe that way (and most of them can clearly afford to buy their own music). I do, however, think that a lot of people would gladly pay for their individual downloads if there were *any way they could.* In other words: Before you accuse me of being a thief, give me a chance to pay.

I don't have a problem with companies taking their chances in the market with a different technology. But I *do* have a problem with them using their lobbying dollars to persuade Congress to take away my own ability to choose in the market.

As for the last part of your comment--what's at stake their is manufacturers' and programmers' freedom to innovate, and not the Microsoft sense. The computer industry is based on taking other things apart and experimenting with them, so as to come up with a better product in the future.

Rockville, Md.: Do you think there is any chance of legislation being passed that would provide consumers with a set of base rights to the electronics products they own?

Rob Pegoraro: That's what DigitalConsumer.org, a new lobbying group, is asking Congress to do: http://www.digitalconsumer.org/bill.html

Washington, D.C.: Will this kind of legislation subject oridanry consumers to statutory minimum damages or even criminal penalties for copyright infringement by the average home-mix tape maker or is it designed to primarily go after large media piracy operations?

Rob Pegoraro: The bill does call for penalties for people who break copyright protections, and does not make a distinction between commercial and non-commercial copying. The possible penalties are listed in the U.S. copyright code (sec. 17, United States Code, if you want to look it up) in terms of maximum penalties, not minimums. Companies might very well decide that it's not worth the trouble or the bad PR to prosecute individual customers. Then again, they might decide it is worth making an example out of a few people.

Washington, D.C.: That seems to be a pretty totalitarian attitude: Congress will decide what is good for industry's rights, and industry WILL accept it? Hopefully the market will determine what is best for itself and reject protection such as the new Celine Dion CD that can't be played by most PCs, and actually damages the operating system in some cases. Is a blunt force approach such as this going to be the trend in copy protection?

Rob Pegoraro: I have no idea if this bill really represents the start of a trend or is some last-gasp effort or it's somewhere in between. What I do know is that it would short-circuit that same free-market competition you describe--your future CD-ROM drive would *have* to work with the new copy-protected CD, even if that compatibility came at the cost of other features.

Washington, D.C.: Rob, in the past I have come across Web pages that can't be printed (i.e. they block one's printer function). Are many sites moving in that direction?

Rob Pegoraro: I haven't seen it. It's a stupid and pointless thing to do--just copy the page's text into your word processor or whatever, then print from there.

LaPlata, Md.: I read that Celine Dion's new album is being released in Europe with the warning "do not play the CD on your computer or it will crash." Is this type of action happening more in Europe than here in the states?

Rob Pegoraro: Yes. A lot of record labels have used the European market as a testing site for these technologies.

RAM guy: Hiya! I wrote in a few weeks ago about my PC running SLOWER after dropping more RAM into his system.

It seems to have been due to using mis-matched RAM speeds: to wit, a PC100 and PC133 chip at the same time. I yanked one, and the system magically started running faster even though the total RAM was less! Word to the wise: make sure those chips are the same speeds -- and NEVER trust Comp USA staffers to know the difference themselves, as I did. Stupid me.

Rob Pegoraro: An update from a couple of weeks ago--glad things worked out. (I hope whatever advice I gave was useful... I can't remember what I typed :)

Springfield, Va.: Personally, I believe that protecting one’s work is something everyone is entitled to. Copyrights do just that. They protect the author. One only has to create something that the public likes, to find out just how many people are willing to take and use it for themselves, without proper recognition to the creators.
Why are so many people against protecting original works? Everyone at the Post seems to be up in arms when freedom of speech is infringed. They are very similar.

Rob Pegoraro: Did I say I had a problem with protecting original works? I don't think so. I also think that copyright doesn't trump other rights. Does my right to protect my work from theft give me the authority to tell you what kind of software to write? I--as somebody whose sole output is intellectual property--don't want that sort of power.

Indianapolis, Ind.: Here's what I'd like to see: a website where I can download any song I want for a reasonable fee, say $2 each. Then I can use the song however I want and in any product I want, forever. No expirations, no new fees, etc. I'd willingly pay for that type of service, and I think others would, too. (Of course, I'd never buy a whole album again, but that's another issue.) Any chance of that happening in the near future?

Rob Pegoraro: I've heard this same thing from other people, except they were offering to pay a buck a song. Emusic.com offers that sort of deal for artists on a variety of smaller labels... has anybody here purchased music off that site?

Somewhere, USA: Nice to see the Post, and other mainstream media, noticing the CBDTPA. Now if we could just get it out of the Business section ghetto and into the op-ed, where the politicians will notice it. I think that telling Frank Wolf that, if he votes for it I will vote for whoever runs against him, will have little effect.

Downloaded and installed KDE3 over the weekend. That anti-aliasing stuff really works! Lots of eye candy!

The only problem was that, for some reason, the default font is Greek. - wiredog

Rob Pegoraro: Good to hear from you again, wiredog. "Ghetto"? That's my cube farm you're talking about!

Reston, Va.: There're already programmers (such as Alan Cox) who won't come to the US because of their fear of arrest (a la Skylarov). I wonder how many programmers in the US would decide to move to a country, such as Russia or India, that values freedom more than the US does, and what effect that would have on the US economy. Could the SSSCA be a long term threat to the national security?

Rob Pegoraro: That is the argument of many people in the computer industry--that talent will go to where it can get the most reward. I think "not being subject to prosecution for improper programming" might count as "most reward."

Falls Church, Va.: What happens to all the people who bought HDTVs without a copy protection chip? Are they left with down-resolutioned televisions no better than standard televisions?

It seems scummy that Sony is selling chipless televisions without mentioning potential obselesence, while being one of the largest proponents of copyright protection.

Rob Pegoraro: I don't think it's necessarily scumminess as much as confusion. People want to buy HDTVs--but without a firm standard on copy-protection standards (something that people have been wrestling over for the last five years), what's a manufacturer supposed to do?

My thought here is that the 2.5 million people who do own HDTVs probably make more money than average and, as such, probably may have given a campaign donation or two themselves. I am not sure that obsoleting their multi-thousand dollar purchases will be something that's going to be politically or economically possible.

Washington, D.C.: This is about your column yesterday. How does Star Office compare as a cheaper version of Microsoft's Office? I know it has word processing and spreadsheet capabilities. I don't know if it has a program similar to Power Point. What is your opinion of Star Office.

Thanks.

Rob Pegoraro: Here's what I wrote about StarOffice 5.2 a couple of years ago:

"StarOffice goes beyond mere annoyance-compatibility to offer a "help agent" that, amazingly enough, is even more intrusive than Word's talking-paper-clip Office Assistant. And where's its word-count function?"

I'm waiting for Sun to ship the 6.0 release (if it ever finishes the thing), then I'll see if it's improved.

Delray Beach, Fla.: Rob, do you see this as an effort on the part of the major labels to actually shift in the way we see their products: "We're not selling 'Music', we're selling CDs"? Or is it closer to Microsoft's decisions with Windows XP to encode self-enforcement into the protections they already have under the law?

Rob Pegoraro: The question here is "are you buying a product, or a license to stuff on the product?" With software, you're technically buying a license to it, and you can therefore be limited in your ability to resell it, reinstall it or copy it. CDs are traditionally just a product that you can do whatever you want with.

OTOH, some of the online-music stores, by treating music as a licensed good, have helped consumers--buying a license means that you can ask to redownload the song as often as you like if your computer crashes, whereas the record label is under no obligation to replace your CD if somebody breaks into your car.

Delray Beach, Fla.: Rob, under existing copyright law, if you fail to vigilantly protect against and pursue copyright violations, you lose your copyright protection. Could we see courts writing opinions that smaller recording artists, if they fail to use certain forms of copyright protection, essentially surrender their protection?

Rob Pegoraro: IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but I believe you are talking about trademark protection, not copyright. Copyright doesn't have to be defended to maintain its legal standing, but trademarks do.

Washington, D.C.: Mt Pleasant: 2 comments for your reaction:
Special interests are passing laws to "enclose" the cultural commons, much as aristocrats did in Europe 400 years ago, enserfing most of the population. Robin Hood was a reaction, but the common folk mostly lost the battle. Then 200 years ago a flood of new technology opportunities allowed hard working peasants to escape the clutches of dumb but grabby politicians. There have been similar cycles over thousands of years. If we don't fight for our freedom we will lose it to politicians and special interests.
Second: there is a flood of better technology possible. For example, ten times higher resolution movies and albums, 3D &c. The special interests try to block innovators from introducing the better and newer tech, even though it will take another 5 to ten years for it to be copied, enough time to recover a reasonable return on their investment. So, what we have is an entrenched gentry afraid of dynamic capitalism because their talent lies in politics not innovation.

Rob Pegoraro: Passing this one on mainly to see what people think. It brought to mind one angle to me: I wonder if we will see any smaller studios, record labels, whatever, decide to go ahead and sell some of these higher-resolution digital products without waiting for "perfect" or "near-perfect" copy protection. I think it would be an interesting experiment in the market. OTOH, I don't have any shareholders or a board of directors to answer to--it's easy for me to make these recommendations!

Somewhere, USA: I've been running StarOffice 6.0 beta for awhile now. It is very different from 5.2. The apps are separated, it doesn't take over the desktop, and it reads most MS files. Though it does have trouble with formatting very complex tables and such.

Btw, Sun is going to charge for the release version. - wiredog

Rob Pegoraro: Yup, that's what I've heard. I've held off from installing it because I don't really have time to play with beta software on my work machine... I'm hearing a May ship date now, but we'll see.

Santa Cruz, Calif.: The Digital Mellenium Copy Right Act 1998 is a vile piece of legislation. We could be entering another golden age of Pericles, but instead we are faced with a more draconian future. I would like to see REAL competition, not cozy ogilopolies, or worse when it comes to telecommunications and media-and futer industry concentration is unaccptable.
I don't want to wake up to a world five years from now and discover that no more than two or three ways onto the NET- at least at the truly high-speed connections that I already find essential. I don't believe it is right that one company should be able to own all or most ofthe major media outlets in my community.
I demand the right to reject anything resembling the legislation introduced last month by Sen Ernest hollings, D-S.C. This favor to the entertainment moguls would lead us down an Orwellian control freak path of putting copy protection in every digital device.
I don't want my P.C. or my P.D.A neuterd into an expensive DVD player. Please don't reduce our greatest invention of our time, THE INTERNET, (which is by the way, the greatest enabler of free speech in the History of the world), into Online Television.

Thanks,
Please encourage the rejection of Mr. Hollings cntorversial "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act

Rob Pegoraro: Again, posting this to capture how a lot of people seem to feel this way. I think Rep. Boucher might not call the DMCA "vile," but he has basically called it broken and tilted against the consumer.

Rockville, Md.: About that argument that people would be more likely to pay if the prices of digital music comes down to $2 for any use of it. I say this could work as well, but not for $2. We must make micropayments a reality. I say at most i would offer $0.75 for one album. This is fair if you take into account the new economics. After all you have a medium in which you don't have to create CDs, package them and ship them out to outlets around the country. The overhead they (the record companies) would save, would be phenomenal, and that cost saving should trickle down to the user. And yes the internet will make their software distributable to anywhere in the world, potentially increasin their otherwise physical market by many fold. I think $0.75 an album is fair to start with if we follow this model, but of course the market will probably drive the price down in time.

Rob Pegoraro: I think that consumers might like that price--but record labels might not. Records are not free to make; you still have to book studio time, pay the electric bill and keep the server up. I suspect that even the local indie labels (Dischord, DeSoto, TeenBeat) would disagree with your contention that they could make a profit on 75-cent downloadable albums.

re: DC/Celinie Dion: Frankly, any product that damages or destroys the function of another is just plain bad - bad corporate policy, bad product design, bad business. And is probably a product begging for a lawsuit - class action or otherwise. There are many ways to protect a copyright and its holder(s) - digital copyrighting is one. But, product destruction or even the threat of it is fundamentally wrong.

What the consuming public has to realize (I know I'm talking to a wall here) is that if you want the priviledge of consuming something you are obligated to pay for it. Period.

Rob Pegoraro: I think that this person is referring to is the Celine Dion CD's habit of occasionally crashing users' computers. Sony PR, in a story at News.com (I think) said this might happen sometimes, but didn't seem to think it was a real problem.

I agree with your second contention, but am torn as to how I'm supposed to pay for things when no option is available. Case in point: A while ago, I downloaded a song from a CD that's long been out-of-print. The band itself is quasi-ancient history. Who do I pay for this?

Arlington, Va.: Regarding interest groups noted above, here is another organization that's active on copyright issues and consumer electronics:

Home Recording Rights Coalition (HRRC)
www.hrrc.org

Rob Pegoraro: This is another group I've talked to fairly often on these issues. But--in the interest of full disclosure--you should know that the HRRC is largely funded by the Consumer Electronics Association. That doesn't mean its conclusions or arguments are wrong or somehow anti-consumer... but you should realize that there are lots of differant angles to this story.

Alexandria, Va.: In response to the 'robin hood' comment from D.C. -- yes, new technologies created new opportunities for common people. But they also resulted in forced expulsions of common people from the land. Advances in textile manufacturing led to the highland clearances in Scotland. The cotton gin made mass slavery economical. There are two sides to your argument.

Rob Pegoraro: I welcome a comment from D.C. after this...

Washtech.com: Rob, news on the Reuters wire just now that BMG is going to test CDs with copy protections "designed to defeat Napster-like services."

Reuters quotes a BMG exec: "The first benefit of doing promos and advances is to get feedback on the technology," said Kevin Clement, BMG's senior director of new media. "And we would hope this technology will stop the records from leaking early to the public."

Rob Pegoraro: Thanks for sending this along. Interesting that BMG mentioned records "leaking early." That means records that people *at BMG* digitized and uploaded themselves--not the company's customers, but its own employees and contractors.

Gaithersburg, Md.: Although I don't use P2P software on my own (too many annoying ads). I do support them. I Think that if you can replicate something at no cost, or virtually no cost (just a few cpu cylces) then there is nothing wrong with it. Sure the people who make content/software/music digitally want to be paid for their work, but that should take a back seat to the technology itself. The technology should be here to make our lives easier, not to serve the corporation. If people can't make money using current business models then don't blame the hackers, blame the models. I think that perhaps make it so that users have a right to encrypt their software and such and make money off of it if they can, but the government shouldn't regulate it. Once its unencrypted then tough... or your choice keep playing the cat and mouse game. The overall effect will be that some things won't be worth unencrypting and people might pay for it. But at the same time it will give the consumer the full power of technology. I think that money can be made in a copyright less world by making the technology work internally (within the company) to improve that companies position against its competitors in physical industries. What this will mean is that under this new model, companies will have to stop being technology only, and instead work with others who have physical good upon which the technology can be used to make selling it more efficient. This is just one example of how money can be made in a copyrightless world. Forget the bill, it stinks.

Rob Pegoraro: That economic model you talk about might work, or it might not. Not only am I not a lawyer, I'm not an economist either.

Let me ask you a follow-up question: Do you use shareware? If so, do you pay for that?

Arlington, Va.: So, is digital copyright law an issue with clear political distinctions? Are Republicans for it, Dems against?

Rob Pegoraro: The co-sponsors of the CBDTPA (that's an awkward abbreviation to have to type in a hurry) are mostly Democrats (Inouye, Breaux, Feinstein), with one Republican (Stevens). OTOH, Leahy (D-Vt.) seems strongly opposed to it. I'm not sure that is an either-side argument... there's big money both in favor of and against this bill.

Pamplona Spain: Can Music Producers be sued if their "copyright protection" damages hardware, or aren't they worried about this and other public relations nightmares?

Rob Pegoraro: I'm not aware of any lawsuits on those grounds, although I'm sure it could be tried. (You can go to court for just about anything, right?) The one suit I am aware of forced Music City Records, the label behind the Charley Pride copy-protected CD, to put a clear label on the disc saying what devices it would and wouldn't work on.

Arlington, Va.: Hey Rob -

Just wanted to say that I have used eMusic and its great - a flat fee for unlimited downloads from all kinds of great genres.

The artists get paid and so do the labels - their site is an example of how paying for digital downloads can work well.

Rob Pegoraro: Here's an eMusic customer (I should add that eMusic is actually owned by one of the "big, bad" major labels).

Plano, Tex.: If free trade laws can prevent the State of Ca from banning a gas additive that is fouling its water supply, surely the same free trade treaties would effectively prevent the USA from banning imports of CD, DVD, etc players that didn't have the copy protection.

Rob Pegoraro: Again, IANAL, but--well, there are all sorts of goods that you can't import to the U.S., even though they pose no overt threat to health. Try bringing back a car from Germany, for instance.

Then again, CD players and DVD decks are a lot easier to transport... and maybe to walk past the "nothing to declare" station at Customs.

Reston, Va: Which industry is larger in terms of dollars, entertainment of tech? Are any movie/record studios making as much money as Microsoft or IBM?

Rob Pegoraro: The tech industry's contention is that it is far, far larger than the entertainment industry. The entertainment industry, meanwhile, argues that all the business it makes possible makes *it* larger.

The current federal stats are at http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2/gpoc.htm - but that list doesn't break out things in exact detail (there's no separate line for the recording industry, for example).

Alexandria, Va.: To paraphrase Sen. Goldwater: Extremism in describing opposition in a rational discussion is no virtue.

The people who call the legislation "vile" miss the point. Yes, I agree that it is bad legislation, but the converse opinion of "I should be able to do anything I want with it once I buy it" is equally bad.

The artists who record their music (and movies and TV shows, etc.) should have a reasonable expectation to derive the benefit of product of their labor. I should not be able to make tens or hundreds or thousands of copies to sell or give away to my friends, neighbors, fellow Internet surfers, etc. On the other hand, I should be able to take the product I bought and reuse it in ways that are most useful to me (just me), whether it is a mix tape or CD or MP3 or whatever.

I think the problem is that technology has advanced well beyond what the law can rationally govern at this time, which goes to the point of your first questioner.

Comment or response, Rob?

Rob Pegoraro: I think this is a thoughtful, measured response. Thank you for it.

Alexandria's right that technology has made a great many things possible, things that the law has no stance on. (For instance, the law doesn't really offer any guarantee of "fair use" as you might understand it--you have no iron-clad legal right to make a mix CD.)

I would add that even when things are pirated, it's still the market at work in one way. The tech industry argues that piracy can be beated in the market--make it easy and cheap to buy honestly, and the file-sharing problem will go away. I think this argument has merit, although I can understand why the CEOs of Universal, Disney or Sony are in no rush to go that way.

The other problem is that technology doesn't offer any simple way to allow "good" copying but ban "bad" copying.

Gaithersburg, Md.: In response to your follow up question. I do occasionally use share ware and i dont pay for it. If it forced me to pay for it i might, but it would have to be cents on the dollar, with an easy one click method of payment (micropayments).

Rob Pegoraro: I hate to make a blanket judgment on the basis of two postings on our Web site--but I think you're wrong.

(Here's my take on that issue.)

Alexandria, VA: I still find it ironic and amusing that THIS is supposedly the "big thing" that's going to cost the record labels and artists so much profit. Artists have been getting ripped off as long as recorded music was around, and labels have no problem with major inefficiencies and spending as it is, so they've obviously got money to burn.

Rob Pegoraro: One of the more interesting things I've heard from an artist came from a guy named Tim Quirk, who used to head a band called Too Much Joy (very funny work, BTW). He said that, when people e-mail him to ask what they owe for downloading one of his old songs, he said "you owe me nothing." He's never going to recoup his original advance, therefore he has no way of making any money off his own work.

That's not true for all artists or all labels, but it's not an uncommon view either. Courtney Love wrote a bit of a screed on this point for Salon.com a couple of years ago.

Landenberg, Pa: Very timely topic as far as I am concerned. How long and far does copyright extend? I was just told today that I cannot use some photos on my web site that were taken in 1922 and are part of a State University's Special collection given to the library some 25 or 30 years ago. There is no commercial use intended and my web site has absolutley no advertising or finacial ties.

Rob Pegoraro: Copyright now extends for the life of the author of the work, plus 70 years. (That's an increase of 20 years from the old term, which Congress extended a few years back.)

Is that fair? I dunno. The Constitution says copyright should be granted for "limited terms," but doesn't define what limited is. I just know these limited terms keep getting extended.

Delray Beach, Fla.: "Records are not free to make... " Right, and Mariah Careys to pay. While I agree that we should pay fairly, it's a lot easier to feel that a little free use is justified when the Sonys of the world make obscene profits, and their big-name recording artists get millions for contract buy-outs.
One of my favorite recording artists swears the big labels are "EeeeeVil" and produces his own CDs, on his FTRC label - Blues Artist Richard Johnston.

Rob Pegoraro: Not saying that I necessarily agree, but this is also something I hear a lot...

Alexandria, Va.: I think we should do away with copyright alltogether. Copy right is keeping me from creating a story that is based on another story. I would have to pay the guy $50,000 for the rights. I am just a regular computer programmer, i can't pay him that ridiculous amount. I have all the hardware necessary to add to his story on my computer using Word. People like me want to make money, but not at the expense of losing our rights to play with the 1s and 0s on our hard drives.

Rob Pegoraro: Does copyright really forbid what you describe? I'm not sure. The fair-use provisions would seem to allow you to do just that. Otherwise, how can you explain the plague of heavy-metal bands that sound like Led Zeppelin--or, for that matter, Zep's numerous borrowings from bluesmen?

(Bonus points for any chatters who remember an atrocious '80s band called "Kingdom Come" :)

Washington, D.C.: Like many here, I can't "see" outside the Beltway too well. Do consumers really care about copyright issues? Have you seen any recent national polling? Your above response about interest groups makes me wonder if there are any consumer-oriented, non-industry-affiliated organizations out there who are engaged on these issues.

Rob Pegoraro: Not that many. People involved in the debates say consumers *will* care when they realize that their ability to buy a functioning VCR is at stake. OTOH, Universal told me that they had a vanishingly small number of returns of that More Fast and Furious copy-protected CD--maybe people really don't mind.

Washington, D.C.: On the issue of micropayments:
I agree with you, Rob, that one questioner's suggestion of $0.75 an album is unrealistic, but I'd argue that $14 is just as unrealistic. $0.75 or $1.00 a song would likely be broadly acceptable to consumers, particularly if it didn't come with fees and surcharges for making the payment.
I'd personally like to see variable pricing for music and other media (this goes for movies, news articles, etc.,) that took into account the market... whereas now you can pay $14 for a CD with 14 songs on it, out of which perhaps 2 or 3 are judged "single" quality by company A&R staff, why not charge $2-3 for the hits and $0.50 for the other songs, or something similar? Why not use software to automatically adjust the price of individual songs based on demand, so that if a hit song is wildly popular, its price zooms up commensurate with demand? Thanks.

Rob Pegoraro: But will buying a CD become like buying a plane ticket? I'm not sure I want that much "demand pricing" in my music.

Arlington, Va.: Just read on CNET that BMG Entertainment, (the major record company owned by German media giant Bertelsmann) "will begin this month to protect promotional releases of its CDs against copying.
That means free samples of new albums sent to U.S. radio stations, retailers and the press will come packaged with software that prevents songs from being copied onto computer hard drives."

I'm scared of this bill.

Rob Pegoraro: Thanks for the extra details. These are the CDs that only radios and reviewers get--not what's sold to consumers. (Except when they resurface at used-CD stores.)

Plano, Tex.: The problem is the business types can't come up with a fair way to sell content, their prices are not related to demand. Older music is often as expensive as the oldest thing, and mid-CD tracks are the same price as the song that sells the CD. The record industry's fear of wholesale copying is preventing them from developing a rational business model. They are starting a war that the other side doesn't want, and its one the record companies can't possibly win. If they can't stop or even slow millions of tons of drugs from entering the country, they won't even effect digital data. The Economics are clear, as long as there is easy economic gain available to the bootleggers or the hobbist, along with a lack of good will, no amount of force on Earth can even reduce the flow of bootleg music.

Rob Pegoraro: I agree on the economics here--stealing stuff may not be legal, but at some level it's hard to tell the difference between that and the market finding its own solution, whether or not all the companies involved choose to participate in it.

My favorite example of this would be the bootleg DVD copies of Star Wars. That market would evaporate if Lucasfilm would release an authorized DVD--until then, the only option is the bootleg route.

Plano, Tex.: You can modify the CD and DVD players all you want, but it will still be relatively easy to make digital copies by modifying the Operating System Software so that redirects the digital data. IF computers are going to play the music, then you would have to control the OS, and the Audio Card to stop even midly knowledgable people from making all the copies they wanted.

Rob Pegoraro: That's the problem with computers in general--they are designed to manipulate and process data, not lock it up. It's difficult to design a computer that locks some data but leaves other kinds open for use.

In other news, the Washington Post has just won two Pulitzer prizes (no thanks to me :)

Springfield, Va.: The same laws that apply to books or newspapers should apply to music and movies. If you buy a book and someone steals it, the publisher is not going to replace it. What's wrong with selling a license to listen to a song or watch a movie? It's intelectual property.

Rob Pegoraro: Here's a question to ponder: If a CD is stolen and your friend has a copy of the same disc, can you burn a new copy for yourself?

That's what I did two summers ago, when my car stereo got stolen.

And with that, I'm going to sign off for now. *Thank you* for some thought-provoking comments and questions. We covered a lot more ground than usual this week. We'll talk soon...

| |



	<img SRC="washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/redesign/adv_discusssion.htm" width=125 height=110 border=0>