[opendtv] Re: Wright Issues Call To Copyright Action
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 10:07:03 -0400
At 9:30 AM -0700 10/30/04, Dale Kelly wrote:
>My mistake was in using the word "employed", you are clearly a consultant.
>Does such a title somehow anoint you to be an objective observer?
I guess that depends on how a person actually uses their role as a
consultant, and the track record they have established over the years
in terms of objectivity.
>You do write a monthly article for Broadcast Engineering magazine, which is
>CEA advertising supported .
Really?
Yest there are a number of advertisers that ALSO have CE divisions,
but frankly, any CE company is wasting their money if they think they
are going to reach consumers of CE products via Broadcast
Engineering. And I have absolutely no connection to the advertising
side of the business. The ONLY "influence" I get are the press
releases sent to me directly, or forwarded to me by the magazine's
editors. We publish an editorial calendar every year, and many PR
firms (and manufacturers) try to make suggestions about including
their products in any given topic. Anyone who reads my columns know
that I am not a shill for any manufacturer or product.
As far as any relationship or favoritism for the CE industry or the
CEA, I'd suggest you look at what I have written over the years.
Let's just say that my relationship with the CEA has been luke warm
at best over the years.
It is true that my opinions about the copyright issue tend to be
closer to those of the CEA than the mass media conglomerates. This
should not come as any surprise. The CE business is strongly affected
by copyright law; the CEA has been quite adamant about protecting
Fair Use rights.
If you look at my work in this area, you will not find much if any
"promotion" of the CEA or their views. I have been consistent in my
belief that our copyright and patent laws have been abused by the
special interests who help finance two billion dollar election
cycles, like the one we are in at the moment. I have been consistent
in my contentions that it is completely unwarranted and unnecessary
to implement the content management restrictions that the media
moguls are lobbying for. I have been consistent in my contentions
that the current perceived problems with piracy are the public's
reaction to the way they have been abused by the content oligopoly.
But MOST IMPORTANT, I have been consistent in my opinions that there
are simple technical solutions to these problems. But more important,
rampant piracy is a strong indication that the marketplace is NOT
working; that the special interests are trying to exact unwarranted
premiums for content, and bundling stuff that consumers do not want
with the stuff they do want.
There is ample evidence that consumers will pay a fair price for
content. It is after all a huge business where consumers spend
hundred of billions annually in the U.S. alone. There are examples
all over the place of successful new products with relatively
painless content management restrictions. DVDs have been a huge
success, in large measure because of aggressive pricing by many
distributors. Apple's iTunes demonstrates that it is quite feasible
to SELL music online at reasonable prices, without the bundling that
makes CDs ridiculously expensive.
>Your published and posted opinions on broadcast
>issues has significantly changed to the negative over the last couple of
>years and now seems to echo that of the CEA, even in your increased use of
>hyperbole.
Obviously, you only seem to be familiar with my recent work. I have
only been writing for BE for the past three years. Prior to that I
wrote for Videography and Digital TV (aka Television Broadcast). IF
you would like, I can send you at least two dozen articles that are
critical of broadcasters and the U.S. DTV transition since 1990. Or I
could send you some of the comments I filed with the FCC in the
Advanced Television process. I HAVE been working on this problem
since 1992.
There is no hyperbole in the the reality that the US DTV transition
is NOT working, at least with respect to OTA broadcasting. ON the
other hand there is MUCH hyperbole about the notion that DTV
broadcasting is about to turn a corner in the U.S., thanks in part to
the arrival of receivers that work.
The problems with the U.S. DTV transition ARE NOT technical. They are
political and economic, based in the reality that broadcasters have
been used to assemble and maintain the media oligopoly that is now
being exposed as the political propaganda machine that it is. Some
consumers are even beginning to understand that the perceived
animosity between cable, DBS and broadcasters is just a smoke screen
to prop up a failing business model that forces most Americans to pay
an unwarranted premium for bundles of programming that they do not
watch and should not have to pay for.
In short, there is no marketplace for mass media content, it is a
tightly controlled oligopoly. And the Consitituional notion of a
public commons for intellectual property has been turned on its head,
thanks to the political and economic power wielded by the media
moguls, who seek to have total control over the distribution of high
value content.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
