UK Net firms in music pirates deal-But is it too late?!?

Six of the UK’s biggest net providers have agreed a plan with the music industry to tackle piracy online.

The deal, negotiated by the government, will see hundreds of thousands of letters sent to net users suspected of illegally sharing music.

But the music industry wants people’s internet access cut off if they ignore repeated warnings, something the web firms say they are not prepared to do.

BT, Virgin, Orange, Tiscali, BSkyB and Carphone Warehouse have all signed up.

Geoff Taylor, chief executive of the BPI, which represents the music industry, said: “All of the major ISPs in the UK now recognise they have a responsibility to deal with illegal file-sharers on their networks.”

Mr Taylor said it had taken years to persuade ISPs to adopt this view.

So far, the ISPs seem to be grabbing the carrot – while avoiding the stick

The plan commits the firms to working towards a “significant reduction” in the illegal sharing of music.

It also commits the net firms to develop legal music services. “Conversations are ongoing between record labels and ISPs,” said Mr Taylor.

Letters to pirates

The BPI has focused on educational efforts and limited legal action in recent years, in contrast to the US, which has embarked on tens of thousands of lawsuits against alleged file sharers.

The six internet service providers have signed a Memorandum of Understanding drawn up by the Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (BERR).

The Motion Picture Association of America has also signed up.

The BPI said the memorandum covered consumers who were both uploading and downloading music.

Mr Taylor said: “The focus is on people sharing files illegally; there is not an acceptable level of file-sharing. Musicians need to be paid like everyone else.”

He added: “File-sharing is not anonymous, it is not secret, it is against the law.”

At the same time the government has started a consultation exercise that could result in laws that force net firms to tackle music piracy. A working group will be set up under the auspices of regulator Ofcom to look at effective measures to tackle persistent file-sharers.

Mr Taylor said newspaper reports stating that online users could be subject to an annual levy to cover losses from file-sharing were incorrect.

“A levy is not an issue under discussion. It has not been discussed between us and government and as far as we are aware it is not on the table.”

He said: “There should be effective mechanisms in place (to deter file-sharing) and as long as they are effective, we don’t mind what they are.”

But he said the BPI was ruling nothing out and nothing in.

In the past few weeks net firms Virgin and BT have sent letters to some customers identified by the BPI, which represents the UK record industry, as persistent music pirates.

‘Long process’

Before now the BPI has called for a “three-strikes” system which would see net connections of persistent pirates terminated if three warnings went ignored.

Many net firms have resisted the call from the BPI and have said it is not their job to act as policemen.

Feargal Sharkey, chief executive of British Music Rights, said the plan was “a first step, and a very big step, in what we all acknowledge is going to be quite a long process”.

Mr Sharkey, formerly lead singer with The Undertones added: “Government, particularly in the UK, has now realised there is an issue, there is a problem there.”

One BBC News website user Mark, from Hampshire, said he downloaded and shared files illegally and argued customers were “getting their own back”.

In an e-mail, he said: “I used to run half a dozen record shops in the 80s and saw how far the fat cats of the record industry would go, in milking customers and retailers dry with more hyped rubbish.”

“Why should I yet again pay for, say, the Beatles’ White Album at full whack? I already bought it on LP, eight-track, cassette, and CD! This is those customers getting their own back.”

“So will this make me sharing a CD with my next-door neighbor over the fence illegal?” he added.

Comments and Conclusion

This subject is always interesting, I used to work for a Major Record Company in digital and I am also an illegal down loader. But banning illegal downloading should have been done years ago, and when napster was shut down a can of worms was opened. To stop people sharing, my view is give them an alternative..

Plus files will be transferred other ways-Yousendit.com must have rubbed their hands in glee hearing this news..

Most people download to hear music, this being the case due to most albums in the last few years especially in the new millennium being one word ‘Shit’, albums full of filler and two decent tracks. Think of most albums you hear and that is the case, let’s face facts.

I-tunes and monopoly of Legal Digital Music

I-tunes has made the single culture a money making revenue back to the hey-days of the music single industry but if you lose the file(s) you download from i-tunes you have to buy another again.

Also I-tunes is just as bad a monopoly as the music industry. DRM is a waste of time exercise and the other problem with legal downloading it is like renting and not owning the product.

Possible Reasons for Downloading

Some people buy albums physically (due to having the physical feel and the inlay and artwork and the whole music buying experience, it is why vinyl sales have gone up) afterwards or delete it off their computer after hearing it..

That is how I buy albums and honestly it has saved me so much money (my word the amount of albums i have which were wasted money) and now my money is put to more beneficial things…

Plus now money is tight with food, oil(petrol), utility bills, travel and so on increasing, it is no wonder why people don’t buy so much music, but live music is on the up…

Explain that one! A cheap £50 ticket to see Stevie Wonder, but the people don’t even own physically Inner visions, or Songs in The Key Of Life, same as the Prince gig last year at O2 hardly anybody knows Princes famous songs only his stuff from Purple Rain and famous songs ie. KISS

But what I resent most with this plan is the control over people, file-sharing is a way of promoting music in a cheap way for record companies, they save so much on marketing due to this, but the backlash is everybody can be a critic.

Plus if you download and don’t share, can you get prosecuted? Check it up as i believe that is where the loophole is.

So now when you think of buying an album, you don’t buy it because of your faith in the artist but what you’ve heard, this means artists have to come up with better material.

That isn’t a bad thing.

Same as films, TV programmes and so on..

Excuses For People not buying Music

People make the excuse CD’s are expensive, that is absurd and the reason being is can you remember only 5 years ago buying a new cd for £15 ($15.99), now the average is £8 ($10) so it is not the expense, people just don’t buy music anymore. You would spend on two cups of coffee from star bucks a day or a nightclub entrance fee or so on.

The music market is different, and I was lucky to be born and grew up in the last great era of brilliant commercial and artistic music the 80’s and 90’s.

The album I buy now are re-issue, deluxe editions and occasionally a good album i.e. Erykah Badu, Fleet Foxes.

But Artists aren’t huge sellers either, we don’t have the The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, AC/DC, Michael Jackson, Madonna, Prince selling 10 million units or more per album.

Only U2, Amy Winehouse have this year and a half sold up to £10 million (I believe)

That is why it is amazing how many copies Coldplay and Lil Wayne have sold due to the same marketing costs as Usher and Mariah Carey.

But Coldplay and Lil Wyane’s marketing plans involved separately free downloads and mixtape marketing, which shows people buy music because of quality..

So should we scrap illegal downloading?

Comments please