Che il mercato digitale potesse invertire la tendenza della crisi lo si sapeva già, e soprattutto per quanto riguarda i dati delle singole tracce molti paesi sono nell’apice delle vendite.

Dalla Svezia arrivano dati incoraggianti per quanto riguarda tutto il mercato. Importate segnalare come l’aumento delle vendite sia arrivato dopo un’ importante legge anti-pirateria.

IFPI svedese dice che le vendite sono aumentate del 18% nei primi 9 mesi del 2009, dato soprattutto dalla crescita del mercato digitale (+80%) ma anche di quello fisico (+9%).

IFPI parla anche di vendite in aumento anche in Corea del Sud (anche lì è stata fatta una legge anti-pirateria)

texto e fotos: Elinara Barros

As mulheres beneficiadas com o Projeto Mulheres Mil, concretizado no Piauí pelo Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia (IFPI), estão empolgadas com o desfile das peças produzidas por elas, que serão apresentadas no Fórum Mundial de Educação Profissional e Tecnológica. O evento acontece de 23 a 27 de novembro, em Brasília.

Segundo a professora Jandeína Uchoa, a expectativa das alunas é grande. “Há duas semanas estamos preparando as roupas. Estamos trabalhando para que todas possam ter suas peças entre as que serão apresentadas no Fórum”, afirma Uchoa. Estão sendo preparadas seis peças para o desfile.

As peças estão sendo produzidas para participar do evento

Francineide Barbosa, Cletciane Castro e Cleide Santos são as três que vão a Brasília participar efetivamente do Fórum. Além delas, mais cinco estudantes do curso de Vestuário do IFPI participarão do evento.  Cleide Santos diz que deseja aproveitar muito a oportunidade oferecida pelo projeto. “Quero aproveitar tudo do desfile e do evento. Os preparativos das peças estão em andamento e até o dia da viagem, estará tudo pronto”, acredita Cleide.

As roupas que serão apresentadas são inspiradas no rio Poti

A professora Jandeína conta que as roupas são inspiradas no rio Poti e que a intenção é mostrar bem o Piauí. As peças trazem cores utilizadas nos produtos feitos pelos artesão do pólo cerâmico do Poti e designer diferentes.

Veja também:
Subprojeto capacita mulheres na área de moda e confecção
Curso técnico capacita alunos na área de vestuário

]]> http://giovannacosenza.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/meno-cd-piu-concerti-e-piu-cari/ Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:26:43 +0000 giovannacosenza http://giovannacosenza.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/meno-cd-piu-concerti-e-piu-cari/ http://gashead.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/ifpicheryl-cole-vs-gashead/ Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:38:06 +0000 gashead http://gashead.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/ifpicheryl-cole-vs-gashead/

Last Thursday I went to the most excellent Children In Need Rocks The Royal Albert Hall concert and carried on my usual habit of videoing some of the concert for fans to enjoy on YouTube. By this morning I had over 120,000 views of my videos and apart from the usual flame wars in one particular video’s comments the fans were happy and grateful.

This afternoon a notice appeared against my recording of Cheryl Cole’s Fight For This Love telling me it was no longer available due to a copyright breach.

Moreover my account was no longer in good standing, 2 more strikes and I could be out! Of course there is a laughable side to this in that when Cheryl performed the same song “live” on X Factor she announced in advance that she would be performing to a pre-recorded vocal. I didn’t watch my video in any great detail as it was a bit out of focus and I missed the beginning but several comments noted that this appeared to be far from a live performance. From what I know about YouTube’s AudioID the soundtrack must have flagged up as an exact match to the original studio recording. Rumbled by themselves LOL etc!

However this does pose a danger to me if I ever happen to record 2 more performances using a pre-recorded music track as YouTube say “Accumulation of three strikes may result in the termination of your account.”

Proper live performers seem to have no difficulties with my many recordings of their performances. Two examples. Editors‘ official forum asked me if I would be kind enough to let them link to my recordings of their concert at Fabric despite it being their copyright. The great Mike Tobin manager of Stackridge contacted me and asked if I could make my Glastonbury 2008 recordings available to the fans with reasonable costs paid to me, I made them available on the understanding a donation would be made to Air Ambulance.

Even megabuck stars like Coldplay, U2 and The Killers have given me no grief whatsoever for videos I have posted. In fact I posted an ENTIRE Killers concert to YouTube 4 months before it was released on DVD. I suppose I should have expected the first grief to come from the record company of an artist associated with X Factor.

p.s. Cheryl I love you! Your performance here, while it lasts on YouTube, was a very pleasant surprise. Shame your record company are threatening my sharing of live music with fans on YouTube

IFPI och en av landets två specialåklagare i immaterialrätt säger i dagens SvD att internet-leverantörerna med Telia i spetsen saboterar jakten på pirater på nätet. Anledningen: Internetleverantörerna följer lagen!

OK. Såhär ligger det till. Internetleverantörerna är enligt lag förbjudna att lagra uppgifter om vem som har vilket IP-nummer längre än vad som krävs för t ex fakturering. Här har dock ett antal internetleverantörer slirat betänkligt men i och med den spotlight som riktades in på dessa uppgifter i och med införandet av IPRED-lagen så har internetleverantörerna skärpt till sig ordentligt och har blivit riktigt duktiga på att följa lagen, dvs inte lagra uppgifterna för länge. Detta tycker nu IFPI och specialåklagaren Fredrik Ingblad är att sabotera för särintressen som IFPI. Lars Gustafsson säger till SvD:

- Vi märker i de polisanmälningar vi gjort att det går trögt. Telia slänger alltför snabbt uppgifterna I praktiken innebär det att Telia och en del andra operatörer saboterar spaningen efter brottslingar på nätet, säger Gustafsson.

Gustafsson säger vidare att han tycker att internetleverantörerna måste “skärpa sig” så att polisens utredare får en möjlighet att göra sitt arbete på ett bra sätt. Kanske behövs till och med lagstiftning för att få operatörerna att spara uppgifter, anser han. Jo du Gustafsson, den lagstiftningen heter “Datalagringslagen” och är ett arv efter Bodström och Socialdemokraterna som lyckades driva igenom detta som ett EU-direktiv. Lagförslaget har legat en längre tid på departementet men regeringen har beslutat att inte lägga fram det före valet, trots hot om vite från EU. Det är dessutom oklart om direktivet strider mot andra bestämmelser som t ex europakonvensionen om mänskliga rättigheter. Datalagringsdirektivet säger dessutom att den lagrade informationen ska användas för att bekämpa terrorism och annan mycket grov brottslighet. Inte ens IFPI har lyckats få fildelning terrorstämplad – än kanske ska tilläggas. Det har dock mumlats en hel del om ändamålsglidning runt lagförslaget.

Andra bloggar om: IFPI, datalagringsdirektivet, datalagring, fildelning, upphovsrätt, Piratpartiet

Andra bloggar om artikeln: Daniel Scythe, MinaModerataKarameller

texto: Elinara Barros 

O Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Piauí (IFPI) oferece, desde 2007, o curso Técnico em Vestuário. As aulas acontecem no campus Teresina Zona Sul nos turnos manhã, para a modalidade de Ensino Integrada, e noite, ofertado para a modalidade Concomitante ou Subsequente.

Na modalidade Integrada, o aluno cursa o Ensino Médio e o Técnico ao mesmo tempo e a duração do curso é de 4 anos. Já a modalidade Concomitante ou Subsequente é destinada aos alunos que já concluíram o Ensino Médio e que buscam mais qualificação com o curso Técnico que tem duração de 2 anos.

“O curso ainda é novo, mas a procura é significativa. Neste ano, são ofertadas 70 novas vagas, sendo 40 para a modalidade Integrada e 30 para a modalidade Concomitante”, afirma Jandeína Uchoa, coordenadora do curso.

Segundo Jandeína, o objetivo do curso é formar profissionais capacitados para supervisionar o processo de confecção dos produtos conforme padrões de qualidade, avaliar a viabilidade de produto do vestiário, acompanhar equipes de trabalho que atuam na produção, entre outras funções na área.

Dentro da grade curricular oferecida pelo curso do Instituto Federal, o empreendedorismo tem lugar garantido. Disciplinas que abordam administração, marketing e gestão ambiental também são ofertadas para os alunos do curso. Essas disciplinas são voltadas para estimular o desenvolvimento do trabalho que será realizado pelos futuros profissionais.

Das kann ja wohl nicht angehen. Dass die Kämpfer gegen das Radio des 21stenJahrhunderst (a.k.a. Filesharing) einfach so aufgeben. Weil sie in einem rechtsstaatlichen Gerichtsverfahren niemanden drankriegen, mangels Beweisen (siehe 11k2).

Daher erklärt der dänische Arm der IFPI, man werde eben gewichtigere Beweise beschaffen. In der Praxis bedeute das ein Beschlagnahmen privater Computer.

Lasst mich das kurz wiederholen: Weil ihr nicht genügend Beweise dafür habt, dass eine IP-Adresse jemandem eindeutig zuzuordnen wäre und diese Person deswegen des Raubmordkopierertums überführt ist, wollt ihr eine Hausdurchsuchung mit Beschlagnahme des fraglichen Computers erwirken? In der Hoffnung, die Beweise dort zu finden?

Könnt ihr vergessen, Leute. In Bayern vielleicht. Aber nicht in einem Rechtsstaat.

( via techdirt) (pic 11k2 cc by nc sa)

Vedad Krehic on ‘intellectual property’ at LewRockwell.com (LRC): How copyright has turned the record labels, software writers and film studios against their own customers.

by Vedad Krehic

9 Nov 09 | LRC

The consumer entertainment industry lobbyists lie. They lie over, and over, and over. They lie to the media, they lie to the politicians, they lie to you. The lies in question are rarely looked upon critically by the media or the politicians, only by grassroots opposition. The main lies involved are all variations on the same theme; copying equals theft. That is to say, if you copy a piece of data – be it a software program, a song, a movie, a book, that makes you a thief. You’re depriving the producer of that work of money which they supposedly have a right to.

I don’t know, maybe I wasn’t “educated” well enough in government schools, but no matter how I twist and turn my logic, I still fail to see how this even remotely makes sense. If I walk into a store and leave with a jacket for which I have not paid then I have deprived the store’s owner of his or her justly acquired, tangible property. They have one less jacket. They are directly harmed by my action.

If a friend, however, lends me a music CD and if I then make a copy, so that I can listen to the music without having to borrow the disc again in the future, nobody is harmed. It is possible that I could, for example, have made an agreement or contract with him when I borrowed the disc stating that I cannot copy it. If I were to do it anyway, I’d be in violation of a private agreement. If not, who is harmed by my act of duplication? I used my own tangible property (CD drive, computer, and hard drive or blank CD) to fashion a duplicate of the data on the CD. The original CD is still my friend’s property. I return it to him, and while he is no better or worse off than he was before, I am now better off. The imprint of the music on my tangible property makes that property marginally worth more to me, as I can enjoy its use to a greater extent than previously.

Was anyone harmed at any point here?

Yes—if you choose to believe the consumer entertainment industry. They claim there was a third party here that was being harmed. Can you see the third party? There was me, and there was my friend. There was my property and that of my friend. I don’t see the third party anywhere in that process. I suppose my friend could have been in a contract with the person or organization he purchased the CD from not to copy it, but I wouldn’t have been bound by that contract. Either way, I did nothing wrong.

So who is this mysterious third party? At which point does he appear, and how is he harmed?

The third party is the copyright holder. Wait, the what-holder? What’s a copyright holder? Where does he come into play?

Well, let me explain. You see, there’s this notion advocated by some—primarily media lobbyists, objectivists and government officials—of an intellectual property (I.P.). What is an intellectual property, you may ask? Well, the gist of it is that if you do anything that requires a bit of work with the big, roundish object mounted on top of your neck, you have a time-limited monopoly on that action if you’re the first person to do it.

Not understandable? Let me enlighten you, dear reader, with some examples.

Let’s say you are the first to invent a new type of screwdriver. According to the theory of I.P., if you register it with a patent office, for all intents and purposes you now own that idea. You own it for a limited amount of time (20 years), after which the ownership magically vanishes. How can you own the idea, you might ask? Well, according to I.P., that means that nobody else can legally manufacture the same type of screwdriver for the duration of the ownership. Or, to put it in clearer terms, nobody has a right to compete with you. You have a monopoly. The same applies for all other sub-categories of I.P., including copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, and so on; but this article is intended to focus mainly on copyright. For an extended discourse and refutation of the other ones, as well as a more in-depth take on copyright, I recommend to the reader Stephan Kinsella’s brilliant essay, “Against Intellectual Property” [.pdf]

Copyright follows the same logic as the screwdriver inventor. It posits that the act of making a “creative” work—such as writing a book, composing a song, painting a picture, taking a photo and so on—creates a different type of property on top of the tangible property that already exists in that item. Follow me, dear readers, if you can, through the logic. Let’s use a painting as an example. The painting consists of a canvas and some paint. That’s the tangible property. That’s what the painting’s owner owns. But, according to the theory of I.P., there is (assuming the painting hasn’t been placed into the public domain or had its copyright expire) another owner, as well. The painter, or whomever he might have signed over the copyright to the painting.

You see, the owner of the painting can do anything he wants with it (within the bounds of the non-aggression axiom). He can throw rancid tomatoes at it, he can hang it upside down, he can embed a block of wood straight through the middle of it. It’s his or her right as the owner. He may not, however, legally duplicate the pattern of paint on the canvas. There is an existing moral prohibition against duplicating it and then selling those duplicates as the original—it’s called fraud. There is no such moral prohibition against merely duplicating it, or, for that matter, duplicating it with the intention of selling the duplicates (assuming one doesn’t claim they are original). The reason he may not duplicate it is that the “creator,” the copyright holder, doesn’t allow it. Granted, there are some exceptions, such Creative Commons or other copyleft licenses which explicitly grant the right to copy within the framework of copyright law. Nevertheless, unless otherwise stated by the copyright holder, the legal assumption is that unauthorized duplication is not permitted.

Can anyone please explain to me how someone can be a just owner of something, yet not be allowed to exercise his or her ownership rights over it? He can throw rancid tomatoes at the painting, but not duplicate the pattern that makes the painting a painting, rather than just canvas and paint? Or, to use a different type of copyrightable pattern, how can someone own their own brain yet not own the part of it containing a song they memorized?

The logical conclusion is that the natural right of property and the idea of copyright, and of intellectual property in general, are fundamentally incompatible and conflict sharply. You cannot own something and have someone else dictate to you what you can and cannot do with it, without that being an element voluntarily arrived at through contract. In absence of a contract, the dictating party is initiating aggression against the just owner of an item. Intellectual property is an assault on tangible property.

What we’re looking at is protectionism in disguise—government giving preferential treatment to one specific industry at the expense of the rest of society. Now, let’s go back to the copyright holder, the mysterious third party who was hurt by me copying the CD’s contents. What I’ve done by copying my friend’s CD is violate a government-imposed monopoly on copying the CD’s contents, the monopoly belonging to the copyright holder. Hence, according to the idea of intellectual property, I’m a thief. I’ve had the audacity to compete with the beneficiary of the monopoly. That is the sense in which I’ve supposedly hurt a third party.

Let’s take a quick look at the current “copyright wars” being waged, in light of the above description of copyright. The music industry in particular and the broader copyright-dependent entertainment industries in general are in decline. Their profit margins are going down, and they don’t like it. The consumers aren’t as pleased with their products as they once were. The seemingly rational course of action for the industry is to look into why consumers aren’t pleased with their products, see what they can do better, innovate, and drop their prices to increase demand. What do the industries (by which I mean the members of the IFPI and MPA) do, however?

None of the above.

In fact, not only are they unwilling to innovate, they have gone to the extreme of starting to sue their own potential and real customers—with the number of lawsuits now over being over 20,000. I’m not a business major, but I’m pretty damn sure that’s not a good way to gain favour with your customers. In their view, every copy made is a lost sale; each person who makes a copy—and a download from a file-sharing network is a copy—must equal a lost sale. Because I’m sure you’ve all gone and bought every single song or movie you’ve heard or seen at a friend’s place, on the radio, on TV, and so on. Let’s cut the crap, okay?

There are many theories on why the entertainment industries’ profits are going down the drain. My own personal favourites are as follows:

1. Lack of innovation and fear of technology. The industries have always been afraid of new technology. The radio, the player-piano, the phonograph, the VCR, cassette tapes etc. were seen as threats by the industry, which responded by attempting to restrict sales and ownership. They’re notoriously skeptical towards new technology, and will bend over backwards to prevent it from becoming commonplace. They’re unwilling to experiment and find new ways to fulfill customer demand. Apple practically had to force iTunes onto the market, the record labels weren’t willing to go along with it at first. They weren’t willing to only sell individual songs, they wanted whole albums sold.One glaring example of the entertainment industries’ fear of technology was ex-MPAA president Jack Valenti’s 1982 statement to a U.S. Congressional panel:

   “I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.”

   As we all know, VCRs went on to become one of the biggest profit sources for Hollywood in history, and now we have DVDs and Blu-Ray discs filling the VCR’s role.

2. Appealing to the lowest common denominator. This applies both to movies and music, but in my opinion, especially music. With their tight working relationship with radio and MTV-like TV channels, the IFPI members of the music industry have, until the last decade, had a virtual choke hold on customers. The radio and TV was the way new music was promoted and exposed to the customer. This is why a good portion of the popular music available today (which, of course, is a subjective opinion—but one many people would echo) is of dubious quality. Need I mention anything more than Britney Spears? The control they once had is now eroding. This is, I believe, one of the core reasons behind their stubborn unwillingness to embrace new technology, and especially the Internet: they give consumers more choice.Movies and news media, of course, aren’t exempt. Every year, Hollywood cranks out hundreds of movies, on which only a handful are truly worth spending one’s finite time. Who truly needs to see movies like Brüno? I mean, okay, it’s mildly humorous. But it’s far from intelligent.

   Here is an article by Michael Crichton discussing the quality of the media, with emphasis on news media in particular. While that isn’t directly what this article is discussing, its observations can be applied to that of the entertainment media as well.

3. Treating the customer like a criminal. You walk into a cinema, buy a ticket, sit down and wait for the movie to start. Then you see this.Doesn’t give you the impression that they like or trust their customers a whole lot, does it?

   But that’s just the beginning of it. The entertainment industries lobby politicians to strengthen and lengthen and broaden the scope of copyright laws. When last I checked, copyright in the U.S. lasts for life + 70 years. Who can claim that a musician should still have a monopoly on his or her works 70 years after they die?

   Furthermore, they lobby for laws like the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), which, among other things, further erodes property rights in that it makes reverse engineering DRM systems illegal. What’s DRM, you ask? DRM stands for Digital Rights Management. Restrictions might be a more apt term than rights. DRM is, in short, copy protection technology. It’s there on your DVDs, your Blu-Ray discs, your Audible audiobooks, and unfortunately many other places also. Sure, one could have DRM without copyright, but it wouldn’t make much sense to do so. DRM makes it difficult, but not impossible, to make copies of the contents of a medium such as a DVD. It’s a failed attempt by the copyright industries to use technology to prevent the use of other technology.

   The results of using DRM have been mainly preventing non-tech-savvy users from making backups of their own discs (as tech-savvy users can figure out ways to copy them anyway) and to introduce unnecessary inconvenience to the customer. Here are a few examples.

4. The entertainment industries’ crusade against file sharing. A truly stillborn, yet relentlessly continued policy. This harks back to #1 & #3, but deserves a mention of its own. File sharing, which is to say, people sharing media content in the form of digital files such as MP3s, has had a history dating back to the beginning of the digital computer age, but in its current, Internet based incarnation dates back only a decade. It started with Shawn Fanning releasing Napster in 1999. There were a few file-sharing networks prior to Napster, such as HotLine and Audiogalaxy, but Napster is the first one that got real traction. Millions of users copying music files from each other via the Internet. The music industry freaked.

They had Napster shut down. Due to its centralized nature, it was a simple case of shutting down the central coordinating server. Since then, file sharing has been a whack-a-mole game with the entertainment industries’ lawyers and paid politicians constantly trying to shut down various file-sharing networks, and new ones—more decentralized, anonymized and secure—popping up to fill their place. And with every blow, they make file sharing an even stronger movement. This isn’t just me being dramatic, it’s a simple fact. They give it publicity. For example, ThePirateBay, a Swedish BitTorrent (a popular file-sharing technology) tracker and search engine, was attempted to be shut down multiple times by various governments, as well as many national government attempting to ban Internet providers in their respective countries from allowing their users to access the site. Every single attempt has been met with ridicule, and ThePirateBay’s user base grew exponentially as a result of the publicity. The previous owners of ThePirateBay are now on trial for promoting copyright infringement. More on ThePirateBay’s legal saga.

All of these elements combine to form a highly unfavourable impression of the copyright industry in consumers’ eyes. Technology is making traditional entertainment industry business models obsolete. Instead of innovating, the industries are using the hammer of government to force their customers to comply with 1970s business models—and now those customers are rebelling. As a result, the measures applied by governments to coerce them just keep getting more and more draconian. The ACTA, or Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, an international copyright treaty which is being negotiated in secrecy, is just the latest in a series of totalitarian treaties promoted by the copyright-dependent entertainment industries.

That treaty, if passed, would mark the death of the Internet as we know it; pretty much every single website and service with user-uploaded content would be forced out of business by the sheer cost of compliance. Bye-bye YouTube, Flickr, Google Book Search, digg, Wikipedia, etc.

We can’t let this insanity go on any longer – eliminate imaginary property!

[Thanks for editorial help from John T.]

Vedad Krehic is a student studying digital media production in Norway. Send him mail.

RELATED:

• Intellectual Property — A Libertarian Critique
• Stephan Kinsella on ‘Intellectual Property’ and Libertarianism (mp3)
• Should You Give Away Your Precious IP?
• Copyright Communism?
• IP: It’s a Market Failure Argument
• The Mercantilism of Our Time
• Monopoly Kills Creativity

texto: Elinara Barros

No total de 60 mulheres da Vila Verde Lar e Cidade Leste, bairros localizados na zona Leste de Teresina, serão capacitadas pelo Vestindo a Cidadania, subprojeto que faz parte projeto Mulheres Mil. O projeto possui o objetivo de formar profissionalmente mil mulheres do Norte e Nordeste e é executado através da parceria entre o governo brasileiro e canadense.

No Piauí, o projeto é desenvolvido pelo Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia (IFPI) e a área escolhida para profissionalizar as selecionadas foi a de moda e confecção.

Segundo o professor Milton Cardoso, gerente do subprojeto, antes da seleção da área foi realizada uma pesquisa de mercado e percebeu-se que falta profissionais capacitados no estado.

A primeira turma, composta por 20 mulheres com idade entre 19 e 70 anos, conclui em dezembro e logo depois inicia a segunda turma. “A primeira turma foi um sucesso e estamos concluindo com a presença de todas as selecionadas”, afirma o gerente.

Milton diz que as mulheres têm o objetivo de formar uma cooperativa para acrescentar o trabalho realizado por cada uma. Para isso, as alunas tiveram aulas de empreendedorismo, cooperativismo e associativismo.

Para Ivonete Maciel, 44 anos e mãe de dois filhos, a oportunidade surgiu no período adequado. “Esse projeto veio em um momento muito importante. Estou precisando de uma profissão e com esse curso vou poder entrar no mercado de trabalho”, planeja a dona de casa.

Upload!

Ok, jeg lider tydeligvis av akutt innleggs-forstoppelse, og sitter med et sted mellom 10 og 20 nesten ferdige, mer eller mindre lange, utkast til innlegg og kommentarer fra bare de siste to ukene, som ikke er publisert enda.

Derfor kommer det en veldig kort link nå, så jeg forhåpentligvis kommer litt på glid igjen også:

http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/kultur/1.6853808

Platebusinessfolka får ikke lov til å sensurere internet i Norge etter eget forgodtbefinnende! Pirate Bay blir IKKE blokkert av Telenor!

Hurra!
En gladnyhet for fremtiden vår!

Pochi giorni son passati dalla news sulla ricerca in cui sembrava che chi più scarica illegalmente più compra.

Oggi IFPI smentisce la cosa attraverso un’articolo sul proprio sito

The net effect of illegal file-sharing in the UK and elsewhere has been to reduce legitimate sales. This is why spending on recorded music has fallen every year since illegal file-sharing began to become widespread.

4th November 2009

Demos, the UK political think-tank, has released a widely-reported survey on music downloading which may be misinterpreted as suggesting that illegal file-sharing stimulates rather than reduces legitimate music sales.

That inference would be completely wrong. The research behind the Demos project, by Ipsos, shows the obvious fact that many illegal downloaders are music fans who buy more music than the average consumer. It does not prove that illegal downloading promotes legitimate sales. On the contrary, the net effect of file-sharing on music purchasing is overwhelmingly negative as evidenced by numerous third party studies around the world.

The research, conducted by Ipsos, shows that a proportion (26%) of illegal file-sharers claim to purchase more music as a result of their activity (this compares with 66% who claim they purchase either the same amount or less music). It also reflects the unsurprising fact that fans who buy music are also prepared to acquire it from other sources, such as illegal services. Eight out of 10 illegal downloaders claim to have bought music in the past 12 months.

These findings do not prove that illegal file-sharing boosts music sales. They only reflect that there is an overlap between those people who download music illegally and those who purchase music. This is not an original finding and it is consistent with the typical profile of many music fans who today acquire music from different sources, some legitimate and some not.

Continua a leggere su IFPI

Teresina será palco de mais um evento videográfico em novembro com a II Mostra Diagonal de Vídeos, que será realizada nos dias 23 a 26 de novembro, no IFPI (Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia – auditório do prédio B, em frente à biblioteca) com exibições gratuitas de 18h às 21h. No evento, será possível para os amantes do cinema e vídeo conhecerem as principais produções audiovisuais em curta-metragem nas várias tendências realizadas no Brasil, contando com a presença de 16 Estados e com a participação de dois países (Bolívia e Portugal) na Mostra.

A II Mostra Diagonal homenageia o cineasta baiano Edgar Navarro, importante ativista do cinema super-8 na década de 70, que terá sua trilogia freudiana exibidas no evento: Alice no País das mil Novilhas (1976), O Rei do Cagaço (1977) e Exposed (1978).

Já como exibição convidada, o Coletivo carioca ANGU TV! estará presente na Mostra com os polêmicos documentários Drogas, Corrupção, Juventude.          No site www.olhardovideo.com o espectador poderá adquirir seu catálogo virtual e conhecer a programação em detalhes, material que estará disponível em breve. Um evento para todos os gostos, um prato cheio de cinema a ser degustado por seus amantes mais sensíveis. Mais de 70 vídeos inscritos esse ano, uma vitrine do video brasileiro.

O trabalho é realizado pelo Coletivo Diagonal, grupo de artistas-pesquisadores em imagem que se reúne com a finalidade de organizar Mostras independentes de cinema e vídeo em Teresina, formado atualmente por Aristides Oliveira, Meire Fernandes e Roniel Sampaio. Com dois anos de atuação na cena de vídeo local, já organizaram seis mostras e co-produziram cinco, sendo duas internacionais exibidas este ano na capital. “A II Mostra Diagonal é o resultado da articulação com artistas de outros estados e países que o Coletivo vem realizando, para que o público conheça o panorama recente dessas produções independentes e alternativas aos caminhos do cinema brasileiro, pois acreditamos que muitos trabalhos audiovisuais não possuem espaço adequado para expressar-se diante da complexa paisagem que o vídeo vem tomando no Brasil. São muitas obras que precisam ser compartilhadas para poucos meios de incentivo e exibição. Diante disso, nós, assim como outras instituições, buscamos contribuir com o enriquecimento da cultura audiovisual em Teresina.” – afirma Aristides Oliveira, um dos organizadores do evento.

O Coletivo trabalha com mais dois projetos audiovisuais. Trata-se do vídeo “Disposições” (realizado no Curso “Você Pode, Você Faz”, pela ABD-PI) e o documentário “Sem Palavras”, dirigido por Aristides Oliveira e Meire Fernandes,com a participação de Bernardo Aurélio (Núcleo de Quadrinhos do Piauí) que conta a história do artista Arnaldo Albuquerque, com vistas de lançamento para o 1ª semestre de 2010.

O coletivo Diagonal

Site: www.olhardovideo.com

Email: olhardovideo@gmail.com

Rede Social: http://olhardovideo.ning.com/

Da det ble bestemt i svensk rett at all trafikk til PirateBay skulle stenges, var det vel ingen som trodde dette skulle bli et skudd på baugen for piratkopistene. Tvert imot. Ifølge McAfees analyser økte antallet nettsider som gir tilgang til kopibeskyttede filer med 300% i perioden da TPB var blokkert. McAfee melder videre at:

The masses stepped up to make this database of torrents available to others

Dette er gode nyheter for oss kopister. Det er enda mer bevis for at vi ikke kan stoppes. Open Source-løsninger, åpen indeksering og anonymiseringstjenester gjør det i praksis umulig å stoppe piratkopiering uten å første skru av Internett.

Samtidig meldes det i media om at det foregår storstilt overvåkning av nettbrukere i USA. Det vil si, det skjer overvåkning av nettbrukere fra hele verden, mens det er FBI som står bak overvåkningen. Kriteriet skal visstnok være “mistanke om terrorvirksomhet”, men etterhvert som dette begrepet har blitt stadig mer utvidet, kan det bety hvem som helst. FBI har nå over 400.000 personer på sin svarteliste, og den vokser med 1600 personer hver dag. Under fem prosent av de overvåkede er fra USA. Betyr det at vi blir overvåket av FBI? Høyst sannsynlig. Nå trenger man altså ikke lenger være konspiranoia-aktivist for å mene dette, det er et faktum!

I løpet av noen dager nå faller dommen i saken mellom IFPI og Telenor – hvor IFPI krever at Telenor blokkerer tilgangen til TPB. Ragnar Kårhus fra Telenor beskriver dette slik:

This would be the same as demanding that the postal service should open all letters, and decide which ones should be delivered

Vi har mer å strides om her på berget. Datalagringsdirektivet er på agendaen, og mens de fleste partier går imot DLD, er Arbeiderpartiet og Høyre mer positive til å overvåke folket. I morgen, tirsdag, er det stiftelsesmøte for organisasjonen Stopp Datalagringsdirektivet. Her vil det være appeller fra de fleste partier. Men ikke Arbeiderpartiet. AP er jo ikke ukjent med overvåkning, de sto jo i bresjen for den storstilte overvåkningen av politisk opposisjonelle i Norge fra slutten av andre verdenskrig til utpå 90-tallet (og enda?). Likevel, her er det bredt spekter – fra ytterste høyre (FrP, Civita), til ytterste venstre (Rødt) går imot DLD. Forhåpentligvis hjelper dette på. Samtidig, det skal ikke mer til enn et flertall i Stortinget fra AP og Høyre, så er plutselig Datalagringsdirektivet innført, så där.

Det er isåfall bare å ta til gata.

Illegal file sharing has had a lot of attention in the media, as powerful record companies are undermined by copyright infringement. File sharing is not illegal in and of itself, but sharing proprietary music and films is.

Heave ho, thieves and beggars, hoist the colors high

A BBC article reveals (from an online survey of 1008 British people) that file-sharers spend an average of £77 a year legitimately buying music, compared to the non-pirating £44 ($140 and $80 AUD respectively). It found that 75% of 16-24 year olds were willing to buy MP3s, ideally at the equivalent of $0.82per track, with 2% indicating they would pay more than £1 ($1.82).
A researcher said: “Politicians and music companies need to recognise that the nature of music consumption has changed and consumers are demanding lower prices and easier access to music”

The Australian reports that the IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, which promotes recording industry interests worldwide) disagrees with the study rather passionately. The ARIA Chief Executive Stephen Peach identified music as the “canary in the coal-mine”, as small file sizes make it easily distributed. ARIA focuses on moral arguments against piracy – that it’s robbing artists and distributors of income. Importantly, he identifies as a problem a consumer expectation that the internet should be free, and that music acquired online has no inherent value due to it being on a computer.

McAfee, the security technology company, has released its threats report [pdf], detailing the 300% growth in illegal file-sharing sites since torrent-tracking site The Pirate Bay was ordered to close by a Swedish judge 3 months ago. Possible factors in increased use are the economic downturn and faster and cheaper internet connections.

There have been several schemes to punish media pirates (and to frighten others), but these have been unsuccessful. The traditional threat is a huge life-ruining lawsuit and fine. Lord Mandelson in the UK announced his plan to disconnect pirates from the internet based on accusations. As has been pointed out, this in no way encourages people to go out and buy music. Not file-sharing isn’t the same as purchasing music.
Fans need a reason to buy, and some musicians know this. Further, there is a continuous growth in legal options for acquiring media content online – iTunes is immensely popular, and new systems are growing in Europe.

Piracy will go on, but consumers are willing to reward artists through purchases and by attending concerts.
The music and film industries have to adapt.

Picture: George Chambers – Anglo-Dutch Naval Squadron Attacked the Barbary on August 27 1816, http://store.encore-editions.com/Artists/irates.html

In a country with a population of less than 10 million such figures are regarded as more than disturbing. This is the conclusion of the latest survey of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), in which Swedish citizens were only asked about their file sharing habits regarding music. Other sensible areas like movies, books, computer games and ebook have been completely left out- their inclusion could make the number of illegal file-sharers in the Scandinavian country even larger.

Compared to  previous studies on that subject the IFPI’s figures are to be regarded as a bitter surprise, with the percent of illegal file sharing never been estimated so high. Of course, it should be noted that the study was conducted via Internet and not via telephone lines,  concentrating primarily on the digital natives in the country. But even so, the fact than more than a third of the internet users in a country shares and downloads copyrighted material without paying, makes the definition of this practice as illegal very  problematic.

Visst, jag har aldrig varit kund hos Telenor. Men de ska fanimej ha creds för  att de står upp mot musikindustrin.

Som alla känner till, så är ju Telenor inte direkt bland de billigaste alternativen, när man ska välja telefoni & internet. Därmed har de nu råd till att sätta ihop ett stort team i kampen för frihet! Jag hoppas verkligen de vinner. Update: De vann! Woohoo! IFPI framstår ju som totalt idiotiska, när det är den här vägen de går. Och skulle de gå någon annan väg, så kommer vi finna andra vägar!

Fildelningsprogram finns i mängder; Kazaa, för de som vill ha virus. DC++ som vill hitta sin skit fort genom sina favorithubbar och Soulseek, för mer svårfunna låtar. Med flera.

Alternativen för att söka efter torrentfiler är också många. Go Google!

Nuförtiden är det också väldigt enkelt/populärt att hitta musik via bloggar.

Viva la resistance!

Relaterat: VG, VG, VG, TV2, DIGI, R24, TU

Enligt Lena Eks bloggpost om förlikningsprocessen i Telekompaketet, så har utskottet “bestämt att de rapportörer som jobbade med texterna i våras fortsätter”.  Alla parlamentariker som ingår i förlikningsdelegationen har DESSUTOM beslutat att inte öppna upp förhandlingarna för någonting annat än 138:an som de enades om skall gälla enligt sitt beslut i våras (till min avgrundslika besvikelse till och med Vänsterns Eva-Britt Svensson).

För det första är det ett fundamentalt felaktigt beslut att låta dessa rapportörer fortsätta, då åtminstone Harbour gjorde allt han kunde för att stoppa 138:an. En person som alltså vill att människor skall kunna stängas av helt godtyckligt från nätet, utan juridisk prövning.

Jag fattar inte varför nätneutralitetsförsvarande parlamentariker gör så här??? EU är ingen demokrati (ändå får EU besluta över våra liv! utan att vi har något medbestämmande) – och det handlar väl därför om att verkligen driva frågor.

Nätneutralitet är ju en utpräglad konsumentfråga, som jag tror att en stor majoritet konsumenter skulle stödja när de väl förstår hur mycket av det som de vant sig vid som de kommer att gå miste om.

Det är också en utpräglad demokratifråga – då det handlar om rätt att ta del av samma information som man nu kan få del av via bibliotek och andra avgiftsneutrala offentliga tjänster. En stor majoritet kommer att bli mer eller mindre rasande när de förstår hur utestängda de i själva verket kommer att bli.

Nätneutralitet stöds också av stora folkrörelser i USA och Obama har ställt sig i täten för att bevara den – en utmärkt våg att rida på – med argumentet att kunde man i “transatlantisk” anda vara så följsam USA när det gäller antiterror”bekämpningen”, att man hastar igenom diktatoriska lagar på löpande band, så skall man väl kunna vara det i en sån här fråga som handlar om rättssäkerheten för det stora flertalet, yttrandefrihet, fri- och rättigheter enligt både Europakonvention, FN:s mänskliga rättigheter och alla grundlagar i de västliga demokratierna.

Att ge efter för de ytterst unkna och farliga högerkrafter som vunnit makt i Europa pga ett extremt lågt valdeltagande samt pga ett alltigenom odemokratiskt och snudd på korrupt styrt lobbyistvälde tror jag är fullständigt och totalt fel väg att gå. Det ger bara dessa mörkerkrafter mer tyngd i stöveltrampen.

Dessutom tror jag att denna vägen kommer att leda till ekonomiskt armod – då det kommer att försvåra för små och medelstora företag, det kommer också att hämma kommunikation, forskning och utveckling, även kulturell sådan.

Enorma följder för ekonomin kommer det således också att få. Av det negativa slaget. Ungefär det sista som behövs när det gäller att ta sig ur recession.

Det är ingenting mindre än reaktionärt.

Dessutom banar det väg för hård repression – för reaktionen bland den stora massan kommer att bli i form av en enorm uppfinningsrikedom att kringgå precis alla hinder, i synnerhet i ungdomsgenerationen som är osedvanligt stor. I kombination med andra protester tror jag att den makt som nu sitter kommer att få bäva och kan falla på sitt eget grepp. Då kommer den att frestas att ta till ännu hårdare tag.

Och hård repression kan fungera ett tag – men kanske inte hur länge som helst.

Därför finns det all anledning att nu snabbt fokusera över på den kommande folkomröstningen om Lissabonfördraget på Irland – för om det inte blir nej där – då är diktaturen ett faktum i hela Europa - och vad värre är. Den har helt och hållet fria händer för det finns ingen kvar som försvarar demokratin.

Precis det som hände när Hitler tog makten 1933 i Tyskland. Inte ens kommunisterna satte ner foten för att hindra hans maktövertagande. Han bara promenerade in. Det krävdes en ännu större diktator för att till slut störta honom – Stalin. Vem blir det denna gång som kommer och ‘befriar’ oss från högerspöket? Putin? Tillsammans med Kina – och Nordkorea? Eller blir det Iran?

EU backar in i framtiden – med ett manus från 30-talet. Det är Massarbetslöshet, Massövervakning och Totalitärt styre med Stockholmsprogram, FRA, ACTA, Inspire, Q617, datalagringsdirektiv, europeisk arresteringsorder, ett totalövervakat och uppstyckat Internet, hemlig avlyssning, åsiktsregistrering osv osv osv. Och snart har vi Presidenten och den Utrikespolitiska Talesmannen här.

För att intensifiera militariseringen så att de eurasiska krigen kan börja på allvar.

Mitt hopp går nu till irländarna – Votail Nil! For democracy. Se de senaste dygnens twitterposter på http://twitter.com/Nemokrati

Se även tidigare bloggposter: Spöken som finns,  Tysk dominans i EU – en s k historisk ironi?, Telekompaketet – Vi vill ha – CRA!, Storebror har vaknat – Och han spanar på Dig – från ‘the Observatory’,  “Den fria rörligheten” – Diktaturen har landat,  Litteratur ej språkkonst, Lagrådet fortsätter fuska fram lagstiftning , Minimilöner och 5 jobb för att klara försörjning,  Riksdagen – Demokratins C-lag, Bankernas bidragsfusk

Se även: Aftonbladet – Staffan Heimersson: “Tyskland tar ett stort steg åt höger“, SVD – Bakslag för internetaktivister om Telekompaketet,   DN – Förhandlingar enbart om paragraf 138,  SVD2,  AB2,  SVD3 – Frankrike försökte påverka svensk riksdagsledamot om Telekompaketet,  DN – Fransmän frågade ut telekomkritiker,  SVD4 – Slutstrid om Telekompaketet, EU Observer – “EU transport chief accused of conflict of interest“, EU Observer (om Berlusconis senaste utspel om ‘core EU’), SVD5,

Se bloggar: Lena Ek – Timmar och timmar om Telekom,  Alliansfritt Sverige,  Scaber Nestor,  Lena Ek2,  Newsmill – Lena Ek3,  HAX,  farmorgun i Norrtälje,  annarkia – taktiska överväganden gav smalare agenda,  sultans blogg,  Karl Sigfrid – Nätneutralitet får vänta,  scaber nestor2,  christian valtersson,  den hälsosamme ekonomisten,

Så jag länkar till lite sköna artiklar som jag läst idag.

• Den första är OlofB som på ett lätt och begripligt sätt förklarar trafikdata med snygga och förklarande egenproducerade bilder som denna. (Måste läsas, läser ni den inte kommer jag att tvinga er att läsa den genom att kopiera den i ett eget inlägg på denna bloggen)

Trafikdata

• Det andra är en debattartikel i SvD av  Madeleine Sjöstedt (fp) Kultur- och idrottsborgarråd Stockholms stad om musik till teaterpjäser på Stockholms Stadsteater och hur stämningar har blivit skivbolagens nya affärmodell i en tid med sviktande skivförsäljning.
• Det tredje är en Newsmillartikel av Marcin de Kaminski om jäv, nöjesindustrin och teknikkompetens i rättegången mot The Pirate Bay

Håll till godo och trevlig läsning!

Är det någon som minns när piratbloggare varnade för att inte bara kommer Ifpi att ägna sig åt sin utpressningsverksamhet i IPRED:s kölvatten, marknaden öppnas för vilket skum fakturaskojare som helst?

Det är enastående vilken korkad lag vi har fått. Men vill regeringen, riksdagen eller Jan Guillou och hans gelikar erkänna det? Nej, de kramar IFPI som vore den upphovsrättsskyddad själv.

Riv upp, gör rätt, sätt Piratpartiet i riksdagen 2010.