In a recent article, RIAA president Cary Sherman took time out of his busy day full of lawsuits to comment on what he refers to as a gross misinterpretation of Fair Use.
The Fair Use section of the Copyright Act in question is what regularly comes under fire from the record labels and movie industry. It is clearly stated that it serves the best interest of the consumer in that he or she may lawfully consume the content they purchased in the time, place and manner of their choosing. Instead, the recording industry would have consumers pay multiple times for the same content in their fight to restore funding for the artists who make the content available.
Sherman describes Fair Use as an "an undeniably important plank of copyright law," and continuing to say that it is "in danger of losing its meaning." He further goes on to say that Fair Use is intended for criticism, news and scholarship and that "it is certainly not an excuse to boost the sales of electronic devices and services on the backs of hard-working creators."
In the article, Sherman takes direct aim at his archenemy in his quest for digital abolishment, the group known as Digital Freedom. Digital Freedom was launched a few months ago by the Consumer Electronics Association to counter lobbying actions taken by the RIAA and bring the consumer into the limelight and stop further plans on making DRM policies more strict. Digital Freedom holds true to their statement in saying that Fair Use rights are "under attack by the big recording labels and studios, who would ultimately deprive individuals of the right to communicate using digital technology."
Sherman took an accusatory stab at the CEA and Digital freedom stating that their campaign is not only based on false and incendiary rhetoric, but tries to sully their name saying that the CEA is not concerned at all with consumer rights, rather with their own bottom line figures. Sherman retaliates with thinking that its OK to make a profit "But to seize the mantra of 'consumer rights' to advance that business interest is simply disingenuous. And to do it at the expense of creators' right to be compensated for their work is short-sighted."
What Sherman doesn't realize is that to say that the CEA and Digital Freedom's lobbying actions are taking money away from the creators as their only platform is false. The CEA is opposed to Senate actions proposed by the RIAA such as the INDUCE Act. Introduced in 2004, its purpose was to hold manufacturers such as Apple accountable for creating devices that even give a portal to possible copyright infringement. Thankfully the act never made it to the committee, but there are still multiple acts proposed to the Senate regularly by the RIAA to take rights away from the consumers.
It appears that Sherman doesn't understand the interpretation of the word fair. If he is, in fact, trying to be fair, he needs to include consumers into his own considerations along with the record labels, songwriters and such. Is it not true that if it weren't for the consumers themselves, artists and record labels wouldn't have the revenue they currently have?
Source:
CNet
Sherman describes Fair Use as an "an undeniably important plank of copyright law," and continuing to say that it is "in danger of losing its meaning." He further goes on to say that Fair Use is intended for criticism, news and scholarship and that "it is certainly not an excuse to boost the sales of electronic devices and services on the backs of hard-working creators."
In the article, Sherman takes direct aim at his archenemy in his quest for digital abolishment, the group known as Digital Freedom. Digital Freedom was launched a few months ago by the Consumer Electronics Association to counter lobbying actions taken by the RIAA and bring the consumer into the limelight and stop further plans on making DRM policies more strict. Digital Freedom holds true to their statement in saying that Fair Use rights are "under attack by the big recording labels and studios, who would ultimately deprive individuals of the right to communicate using digital technology."
Sherman took an accusatory stab at the CEA and Digital freedom stating that their campaign is not only based on false and incendiary rhetoric, but tries to sully their name saying that the CEA is not concerned at all with consumer rights, rather with their own bottom line figures. Sherman retaliates with thinking that its OK to make a profit "But to seize the mantra of 'consumer rights' to advance that business interest is simply disingenuous. And to do it at the expense of creators' right to be compensated for their work is short-sighted."
What Sherman doesn't realize is that to say that the CEA and Digital Freedom's lobbying actions are taking money away from the creators as their only platform is false. The CEA is opposed to Senate actions proposed by the RIAA such as the INDUCE Act. Introduced in 2004, its purpose was to hold manufacturers such as Apple accountable for creating devices that even give a portal to possible copyright infringement. Thankfully the act never made it to the committee, but there are still multiple acts proposed to the Senate regularly by the RIAA to take rights away from the consumers.
It appears that Sherman doesn't understand the interpretation of the word fair. If he is, in fact, trying to be fair, he needs to include consumers into his own considerations along with the record labels, songwriters and such. Is it not true that if it weren't for the consumers themselves, artists and record labels wouldn't have the revenue they currently have?
Source:
CNet
