Wednesday, 13 July 2011
Assange faces enforced leisure to ponder folly of a law passed in haste
As Julian Assange's extradition appeal begins today in London, the British government is considering a parliamentary review which recommended drastic changes to the European Arrest Warrant legislation. Widely regarded as a seriously flawed instrument, the extradition mechanism that will decide Assange's immediate future was agreed to immediately after September 11, 2001. Its purpose was to enable speedy prosecution across Europe of suspects wanted for terrorism and serious crime under a warrant that could be honoured with minimal scrutiny.
There are two serious problems with the way this law operates: the failure to protect the human rights of the accused, such as a guarantee of a fair trial; and its misuse. A vast number of warrants have been issued, predominantly to prosecute trivial offences or matters that would be regarded as civil matters in Britain.
Requesting states do not even need to provide any evidence. And for 32 listed crimes there is no requirement to prove double criminality. That is, the alleged conduct need not be regarded as a crime in the country from which an accused is extradited. If one European Union state provides a different definition of an offence but the same conduct would not meet the definition of the offence in the other country, the person will still be extradited.
Poland issued 5000 warrants in 2008. People have been trawled through the legal system for crimes such as stealing chickens - as in the case of a person extradited to the Czech Republic.
Clearly there has been no respect for the principle of proportionality in the application of the law. David Blunkett, the British home secretary who presided over the law's introduction, says the system needs reform: ''When we agreed to the system we believed people would act rationally.''
A British resident, Jacek Jaskolski, successfully defended a warrant issued by Poland for exceeding his overdraft limit, but the warrant has not been withdrawn, limiting his ability to visit other European countries without fear of arrest.
Even if an individual can successfully defend a warrant, the country seeking his surrender is under no obligation to remove the outstanding warrant. Should Assange successfully resist the warrant issued by Sweden, there is no guarantee he would not face a similar fate.
The treaty needs to be amended to remove this adverse consequence.
The human rights group Fair Trials International says there are many cases in which serious injustices have resulted, such as people serving prison sentences after an unfair trial or being held in detention for years before they can appear before a court to establish their innocence.
A British citizen, Andrew Symeou, was extradited to Greece in 2009 and charged with manslaughter over the death of a man two years earlier. Despite compelling evidence of mistaken identity and the retraction of statements by witnesses who alleged police intimidation, Symeou remained in jail for 11 months before he was released on bail and bound to remain in Greece awaiting his trial.
Two weeks ago, after a four-year ordeal, he was acquitted by a jury, his parents having spent their savings to support his case in the intervening years. The prosecutor himself recommended Symeou be acquitted.
In Assange's case, the original prosecutor, Eva Finne, declared there was no rape case to answer, despite the far broader definition of rape in Swedish law than in Britain. There is no provision for bail under Swedish rape laws, so Assange would remain in jail until the Swedish prosecution case is heard, however long that takes. The miscarriage of justice in Symeou's case would have been avoided if appropriate scrutiny of the evidence by a court in the country granting the extradition were a requirement.
Assange is fighting extradition for a crime that does not exist in Britain. Under Swedish law, rape is not about the withdrawal of consent but rather is defined by the use of physical force in acts of sex. Rape is a category one crime under the European Arrest Warrant regime, though Assange's case involves the most minor version of this charge under Swedish law.
Assange's lawyers say it is unlikely he could be prosecuted on the alleged facts under British law. The magistrate who heard the case said the behaviour would be an offence in Britain, but Britain's leading criminal lawyer, Professor Andrew Ashworth, disagreed.
Only proper scrutiny of the evidence could determine who is right. But that would be immaterial in any case, as there is no double criminality requirement for rape. If a country ticks the ''rape'' box, it doesn't matter if ''minor rape'' as defined by Sweden is not a crime in Britain. Moreover, Assange will be tried in a closed court in a case he believes is politically motivated. How will the world scrutinise proceedings under those circumstances?
Blunkett admits he was not sensitive enough to potential problems. Such oversights have taken a terrible toll on people caught in a system with no proper safeguards, including Assange, an Australian citizen.
Mary Kostakidis @'National Times'
There are two serious problems with the way this law operates: the failure to protect the human rights of the accused, such as a guarantee of a fair trial; and its misuse. A vast number of warrants have been issued, predominantly to prosecute trivial offences or matters that would be regarded as civil matters in Britain.
Requesting states do not even need to provide any evidence. And for 32 listed crimes there is no requirement to prove double criminality. That is, the alleged conduct need not be regarded as a crime in the country from which an accused is extradited. If one European Union state provides a different definition of an offence but the same conduct would not meet the definition of the offence in the other country, the person will still be extradited.
Poland issued 5000 warrants in 2008. People have been trawled through the legal system for crimes such as stealing chickens - as in the case of a person extradited to the Czech Republic.
Clearly there has been no respect for the principle of proportionality in the application of the law. David Blunkett, the British home secretary who presided over the law's introduction, says the system needs reform: ''When we agreed to the system we believed people would act rationally.''
A British resident, Jacek Jaskolski, successfully defended a warrant issued by Poland for exceeding his overdraft limit, but the warrant has not been withdrawn, limiting his ability to visit other European countries without fear of arrest.
Even if an individual can successfully defend a warrant, the country seeking his surrender is under no obligation to remove the outstanding warrant. Should Assange successfully resist the warrant issued by Sweden, there is no guarantee he would not face a similar fate.
The treaty needs to be amended to remove this adverse consequence.
The human rights group Fair Trials International says there are many cases in which serious injustices have resulted, such as people serving prison sentences after an unfair trial or being held in detention for years before they can appear before a court to establish their innocence.
A British citizen, Andrew Symeou, was extradited to Greece in 2009 and charged with manslaughter over the death of a man two years earlier. Despite compelling evidence of mistaken identity and the retraction of statements by witnesses who alleged police intimidation, Symeou remained in jail for 11 months before he was released on bail and bound to remain in Greece awaiting his trial.
Two weeks ago, after a four-year ordeal, he was acquitted by a jury, his parents having spent their savings to support his case in the intervening years. The prosecutor himself recommended Symeou be acquitted.
In Assange's case, the original prosecutor, Eva Finne, declared there was no rape case to answer, despite the far broader definition of rape in Swedish law than in Britain. There is no provision for bail under Swedish rape laws, so Assange would remain in jail until the Swedish prosecution case is heard, however long that takes. The miscarriage of justice in Symeou's case would have been avoided if appropriate scrutiny of the evidence by a court in the country granting the extradition were a requirement.
Assange is fighting extradition for a crime that does not exist in Britain. Under Swedish law, rape is not about the withdrawal of consent but rather is defined by the use of physical force in acts of sex. Rape is a category one crime under the European Arrest Warrant regime, though Assange's case involves the most minor version of this charge under Swedish law.
Assange's lawyers say it is unlikely he could be prosecuted on the alleged facts under British law. The magistrate who heard the case said the behaviour would be an offence in Britain, but Britain's leading criminal lawyer, Professor Andrew Ashworth, disagreed.
Only proper scrutiny of the evidence could determine who is right. But that would be immaterial in any case, as there is no double criminality requirement for rape. If a country ticks the ''rape'' box, it doesn't matter if ''minor rape'' as defined by Sweden is not a crime in Britain. Moreover, Assange will be tried in a closed court in a case he believes is politically motivated. How will the world scrutinise proceedings under those circumstances?
Blunkett admits he was not sensitive enough to potential problems. Such oversights have taken a terrible toll on people caught in a system with no proper safeguards, including Assange, an Australian citizen.
Mary Kostakidis @'National Times'
The Dirty Nil - Fuckin' Up Young
How could you NOT like a band that like fuzz, pizza, vinyl, bad habits, beer, power chords, stompin' tom, feedback, fuzz, anything with big knobs and blinking lights, dogs (fuck cats/fuzz cats), coffee, haters, beer, fuzz bass, the replacements, not remembering the night before, quentin tarantino, tube amps, waffles, analog, swearing, distorted anything, willie nelson, bacon, soda pop, french fries, and noise.
Via
Via
Luke, Dave, and Kyle, keep on rockin' in a free world XXX
Real Scenes: Bristol
The eyes of the world have turned to the UK in recent years and have found some of the most exciting, genre-defying young artists to emerge from electronic music. But while London's scene can be fractious and hard to pin down, there seems to be something in the air in Bristol that unites its participants. Whether they're creating dubstep, house, techno or something else entirely, the cross-pollination in Bristol is unique. In RA's first official entry into video, we journey to Bristol to explore how the city has flourished in recent years, discovering why this small metropolis is one of the most influential electronic music outposts in the world today.
Visit the feature page on RA: residentadvisor.net/feature.aspx?1360
Tuesday, 12 July 2011
Operation Julie: How an LSD raid began the war on drugs
A new book casts fresh light on an undercover operation that smashed one of the most extraordinary drug rings the world has ever seen and changed British policing forever. What was Operation Julie?
It was hardly a typical drugs bust. When police from around the country swooped before dawn one morning in 1977, dozens of the 800 officers working the case looked like unshaven, long-haired hippies plucked from the audience of a Pink Floyd gig.And the vast LSD co-operative they were targeting was, if anything, even more unconventional.
Its leading members included doctors, scientists and university graduates - motivated, they insisted, by an evangelical drive to transform human consciousness itself.
But for all their peace-and-love ideals, their conspiracy was, at the time, the biggest drug ring the UK had ever seen and one of the world's largest. After officers seized a haul large enough for six million trips, the price of an acid tab on Britain's streets reportedly leapt from £1 to £5 overnight.
The investigation, codenamed Operation Julie, didn't just destroy one cartel.
It arguably represented the final death throes of the 1960s counterculture, conclusively shattering the idealism with which many had once viewed the drugs scene and marking the start of a harsher, more brutal era for the narcotics underworld.
In addition, its unprecedented scale and co-operation between forces changed forever the way Britain was policed and set the tone for the so-called war on drugs of the 1980s.The inquiry led to raids on 87 homes, resulting in more than 100 arrests and 15 ringleaders being sentenced to a combined 120 years in jail.
But it began in the unlikely setting of Cambridge University's radical academic fringe, inspired by LSD pioneer Timothy Leary's belief that the drug broadened the mind and could transform society for the better.
The catalyst was David Solomon, a Californian bohemian intellectual and associate of Leary's who came to Cambridge in 1967. Two years later he was introduced to Richard Kemp, a Liverpool University chemist. Soon Kemp was meeting others in Solomon's circle and their first LSD production runs began at the American's home, a former vicarage.
One of the radicals who came to assume a key role within the organisation was Leaf Fielding, an anarchist former public schoolboy who had dropped out of university following his introduction to acid at the age of 18. He began as the tabletter, turning the raw chemicals into individual doses, and later took over the distribution network.
As he recounts in his newly released memoir, To Live Outside the Law, the fullest account yet of the Operation Julie story by a conspiracy insider, it was the promise of building a new society and seeking a way out of the cold war's nuclear stand-off that drove the gang at first rather than money."We were all extremely idealistic," he recalls. "I was convinced that this was the answer to the world's problems.
"We saw it as a new awakening out of the terrible impasse that the world had got itself into."
In 1973, fearful of police attention, one wing of the co-operative led by Kemp and Solomon moved to west Wales while another branch remained in London.
The influx of these counter-cultural figures into villages and towns like Llanddewi Brefi - later the fictional home of Little Britain's Dafydd - and Tregaron was less conspicuous than might be imagined.
Ceredigion's natural beauty and low cost of living had already attracted a sizeable hippy population, according to Lyn Ebenezer, author of Operation Julie: The World's Greatest LSD Bust, who was working as a local freelance journalist at the time. The likes of the Rolling Stones, John Lennon and Jimi Hendrix had all made pilgrimages to the area.
The LSD ringleaders all held down jobs, mixed with their neighbours and stood their rounds in local pubs. As a result, Ebenezer says, they quickly became popular figures.
"They were great characters," he says. "They added colour.
"Yes, they were differently attired to the locals. But most country dwellers knew they weren't the archetypal hippies who don't do any work and just pick up their Giros [benefit payments]. They were part of the community."
Indeed, like many in the ring, Fielding did not need to take the risks he did. By the time of the raids, he had built up a thriving legitimate business, a healthfood shop, in Reading. Shortly before the bust he told his co-conspirators that he wanted out."We began as idealists but then paranoia crept in," he recalls.
They had good reason to be paranoid. After police discovered a torn-up piece of paper spelling one of the ingredients of LSD in Kemp's car following a crash, an unprecedented multi-police force drugs investigation began. It was codenamed Operation Julie after one of its officers, Sgt Julie Taylor, and later name-checked in the Clash song Julie's Been Working for the Drug Squad.
Listening devices were installed in the ringleaders' home and dozens of undercover officers were sent into west Wales posing as hippies to place them under surveillance during a 13-month operation.
Dai Rees, then a drugs squad inspector with Dyfed Powys police, was one of those who transformed themselves.
"We grew long hair, we wore jeans, we looked quite scruffy," he remembers. "To have worn a stiff collar and tie would have been impossible."
On 26 March 1977, detectives finally swooped. They uncovered evidence of a massive operation, exporting to 100 countries and, according to some reports, supplying 90% of the UK's LSD.
Share certificates and details of Swiss bank accounts provided further evidence that the ring had come a long way from its early, idealistic roots - it was now a multi-million pound, multi-national corporation.
For the police, halting the gang and jailing its leaders was viewed as a massive achievement and subsequent investigations would follow the cross-force example of Operation Julie.
Dai Rees remains proud to have played a role in this collective effort."We were totally convinced that we were doing the right thing," he says. "I think every police force in the country at that time had some experience of individuals who had ended up in mental hospitals or been involved in serious crime as a result of of LSD."
But, nonetheless, he couldn't help seeing the incarceration of such intelligent and a well-educated people as a tragic waste.
"When you see such talent going down the stairs from the dock to start a term of imprisonment, you don't leap around with joy," Rees says.
Kemp was sentenced to 13 years in prison and his partner Christine Bott, a qualified doctor, to nine years. Their convictions led to the end of the ring's LSD-manufacturing activities.
Fielding, who was sentenced to eight years in prison, observes that the drugs gangs who stepped into the vacuum were far nastier than his own.
Having built up another food business and opened an orphanage in Malawi following his release, he says he has no regrets. Nonetheless, he no longer believes in the capacity of LSD to transform the planet.
"I now realise how unrealistic that was - you can't solve the world's problems with a pill," he acknowledges.
"Obviously some people did suffer and I don't feel great about that. But some drugs work for some people and others don't - I like a drink with my meal but I'm not an alcoholic."
Views about the war on drugs, in which Operation Julie can be seen as the opening campaign, will remain divided. But the legacy of a group of hippies in rural Wales lives on.
Jon Kelly @'BBC"
As The Clash sang:
Was George Orwell a fan of the News of the World?
In its final issue, the News of the World made much of a 1946 George Orwell essay in which the great writer had namechecked it. But was the Animal Farm author really an admirer of the paper?
History was always going to play a major part in the News of the World's final issue. With few big stories, past glories were to the fore, including the paper's first ever front page from 1 October 1843. On page three, the paper opted for a farewell editorial. It began with a quote from George Orwell - used as a character witness for the paper - repeating the opening of his famous essay Decline of the English Murder.
"It is Sunday afternoon, preferably before the war. The wife is already asleep in the armchair, and the children have been sent out for a nice long walk. You put your feet up on the sofa, settle your spectacles on your nose and open the News of the World."
The News of the World editorial said of Orwell's words: "They were written in 1946 but they have been the sentiments of most of the nation for well over a century and a half as this astonishing paper became part of the fabric of Britain, as central to Sunday as a roast dinner."
But was that what Orwell was really saying? The blogger and communications expert Max Atkinson says they have linked the great writer to some dubious claims. "Are they part of the fabric of Britain? No! As central to Sunday as roast dinner? No! This is self aggrandising, megalomaniac, boastful and untrue stuff."
Orwell was interested in the lives of the working class. But while the essay depicts the quintessential lazy Sunday, it also satirises the prurience that newspapers - the News of the World is the only one mentioned by name - encourage.
"In these blissful circumstances, what is it that you want to read about?" the essay reads. "Naturally, about a murder." Orwell goes on to relate how these murders are "re-hashed over and over again by the Sunday papers".
Atkinson remembers the paper even in the late 1950s as being too racy for him to be allowed to read at boarding school. "In those days they'd send stringers around to the local Crown Courts to report on the local sex cases. They were constantly talking about people having carnal knowledge with underage girls."
For him, Orwell's essay is far from complimentary to the News of the World. "It doesn't sound to me as though the quote they used was Orwell doing a top reader recommends. They're misrepresenting Orwell to suggest he's a fan of the paper." Orwell bibliographer Peter Davison says that in Decline of the English Murder he neither approves nor disapproves of the paper. "He's describing a scene in ordinary households about what's happening on a Sunday afternoon. He had a very good idea of how ordinary people lived."
He has no problem with the News of the World's use of the essay - "they picked up a good quote and used it". But Orwell was often critical of the press. He worried about the power of right-wing press barons then and it is unlikely he would have approved of a Rupert Murdoch now, he says.
"I don't think he would have approved of a newspaper baron who lived abroad and changed his nationality to advance his business interests."
Nick Cohen, author of What's Left, says Orwell loved the "vulgar working class culture" that went hand-in-hand with the News of the World.
In today's terms the 1946 News of the World fitted into the notion of English decency that the Decline of the English Murder was about, Cohen argues. "It was very genteel, it wouldn't run a story like today's paper would have done. It was raucous but also very well written."
Orwell saw the paper as part of decent working class life. For that reason the News of the World are entitled to trumpet his essay about the paper's past, Cohen says. But that was 1946.
"How can you tell what a writer who died in 1950 would say about 2011?" he asks.
Cohen guesses that if Orwell were alive today, he would have been "depressed" by what he read.
Tom de Castella @'BBC'
Beck meets former chair of terror organization
Kach and Kahane Chai (a faction of the party, formed after Kahane’s death) were outlawed in Israel. Both groups are considered terrorist organizations by Canada, the European Union and the United States.
See, for example, item 20 of the State Department’s current list of designated foreign terrorist 0rganizations.
I am sure that Beck, a self appointed expert on terrorism and the new world order, will explain this as part of his field work.
Don’t miss Ami Kaufman’s report from the historic event.
@'+972'
Israel Begins Deporting "Fly-In" Activists
Bethlehem, West Bank - Israel prevented a gathering of foreigners here on Friday by blocking, deterring or deporting hundreds of air travelers who had been invited by Palestinian activists to fly into Israel’s Ben-Gurion International Airport and then travel to the West Bank for a week of “fellowship and actions.”
Israel has traditionally been welcoming of foreign tourists, including more than a million Christian pilgrims who visited this Palestinian city of the Nativity last year. But the Israeli authorities prepared for days to head off Friday’s planned fly-in. The Israeli news media added to the hype by calling it a “flightilla” — a reference to the flotilla of boats that was supposed to challenge Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza last month but has been stymied by Israeli pressure and by the cooperation of the Greek port authorities.
As a result, most of the foreigners who planned to fly to Tel Aviv and join the “Welcome to Palestine” initiative were either deterred from trying to come or were prevented from boarding flights to Israel by foreign airlines, on instructions from the Israelis.
The Palestinian hosts decried the Israeli measures, but also chalked up a small victory.
Fadi Kattan, a Palestinian organizer, said at a news conference in Bethlehem that he was “pleased — sadly pleased” that the episode had exposed what he described as Israel’s draconian anti-Palestinian policies...
Continue reading
Brazil Reaches Wind Energy Milestone
According to the Brazilian Association of Ecological Energy ABEEólica, by 2013 the nation is on track to produce as much as 5.3 gigawatts of electricity through wind farm projects, and an eight-fold increase in capacity over the next five years -- the highest growth potential in South America, says Renewable Energy Focus.
But despite Brazil's improving clean energy infrastructure derived from wind, it is not without its shortcomings, particularly compared to gains being made in other developing countries. There remains huge swaths of land that have yet to be explored as potential sites for wind farms, largely because the cost to build them is too high compared to other energy sources. Currently, wind accounts for less than one percent of total energy produced in Brazil, though that number is bound to rise...
Continue reading
Stephen Messenger @'treehugger'
Monday, 11 July 2011
MichaelWolffNYC MichaelWolff
#MURDOCHGATE Get out of Dodge strategy being discussed at News Corp: Sell all of News Int.
#MURDOCHGATE Get out of Dodge strategy being discussed at News Corp: Sell all of News Int.
GeorgeMichael George Michael
Just spoke to my lawyer.... apparently they want to interview me about my comments on Rebekah Brooks here on twitter...
Mona says This?
Mona says This?
Paul McGuinness - Digital downloads: The 'age of free' is coming to an end
Three years ago, somewhere between U2’s album No Line on the Horizon and the 360 Degree world tour, I plunged into the raging debate over the future of music in the age of “free”.
My campaign has focused on the role of internet companies, and the crucial difference they could make if they confronted the systemic copyright infringement that has helped wipe out so many musicians, bands and labels in recent years. It has been a frustrating and slow-moving process. In many countries internet service providers (ISPs) have consistently and stubbornly resisted cooperation.
This week, however, from the world’s largest entertainment market, the US, comes good news. The biggest US ISPs have just agreed with music and film industries to introduce a new system of “copyright alerts”. These are warnings that, with escalating urgency, aim to nudge broadband users away from piracy towards downloading and streaming music from legitimate services. There will be the prospect of deterrent sanctions for those who repeatedly ignore the warnings.
This has been agonisingly slow in coming, but it is an important step forward in the international debate over music in the digital age. The idea of ISPs taking on obligations to stop copyright theft on their networks is moving into the mainstream.
The US is not the first country where ISPs have started to cooperate with rights holders. Similarly sensible thinking broke out in France in 2007, thanks to President Sarkozy. France, along with a growing number of other countries, including South Korea and most recently New Zealand, has introduced a so-called graduated response law, obliging ISPs to take proactive steps to help curb copyright abuse. The UK has passed its Digital Economy Act which, if it is implemented effectively, will go down a similar route.
Different countries will approach this their own way, and there can be no one model for exactly how ISPs get involved. The US agreement is a voluntary private sector deal – elsewhere the route almost certainly needs to be different. In virtually all other countries, private negotiations have proved worse than fruitless, leaving legislation as the only route possible.
Why is the needle in this debate on the move? First, no doubt because “free” is no longer just a problem for the music industry. Film studios, book publishers and newspapers are all now in the same storm, caught in a race against the clock to sort out successful business models before being sunk by illegal file-sharing or other forms of “free”.
Another reason is that it is nowadays impossible to argue, as many used to, that there is a purely market-based solution to piracy. The music industry has led the field with new models for consumers – there are over 470 digital music services worldwide, many of them “free-to-consumer” sites such as Spotify and We7. None of these services has much hope of long- term success while competing in a world where, according to IFPI, 95 per cent of all music downloads are illegal.
For some years, “fighting free with free” seemed the answer to all our problems. Today, that honeymoon is over. Spotify, in many countries the champion of the free-to-consumer music streaming service, is now cutting back on its free offering. It is trying to migrate its fans into payers, offering a £10 monthly subscription. That is a huge challenge.
Like newspapers which have hastened to erect website pay walls they prematurely abandoned years ago, the music industry has discovered an inconvenient truth – “free” does not really pay. It cannot sustain the artist royalties, the copyright fees and the investment that makes the artist’s career possible in the first place.
And that is the fundamental problem – who will fund the future of music? This is not an issue that directly affects a band like U2, of course. Yet I still don’t see a clear answer to the question I asked in my maiden “ISP speech” three years ago – in a world of 95 per cent piracy, where is the investment going to come from to fund the next generation of bands such as U2 and Coldplay?
The answer to me is clear. A thriving music business needs a fair, responsible environment to work in, and ISPs, the internet's gatekeepers, hold the key to this. By the graduated response approach and other measures like systematically blocking infringing websites they can significantly reduce digital piracy. Surveys, the latest by Hadopi in France in May, prove what should be obvious: that when people see rules protecting copyright being enforced, they actually change their behaviour.
No one expects teenagers brought up in the age of Limewire to convert overnight to legal download sites. Yet the migration to legitimate ways of enjoying music, respecting copyright owners, will happen over time.
The ISP agreement in the US is good news for music and the creative industries. It is time now for action elsewhere. In Europe, Commissioner Barnier is reviewing EU copyright enforcement rules for the digital age. This is a chance for Europe to use its legislative clout to get ISPs to cooperate.
Other governments have long been debating their own approaches. Now is the time to stop the thumb-twiddling and the soul-searching. ISPs need to be active partners, not bystanders, in shaping a legitimate internet where artists and creators can be sustained by their work. In the US they have made a welcome voluntary step in that direction. Elsewhere, it will need the pressure of government and legislation to make it happen.
Paul McGuinness is the Manager of U2.
@'The Telegraph'
I really do NOT like being lectured to by millionaire, tax avoiders...how about you?
And don't worry I think U2's music is so crap that I don't even download it for free!
Why is the needle in this debate on the move? First, no doubt because “free” is no longer just a problem for the music industry. Film studios, book publishers and newspapers are all now in the same storm, caught in a race against the clock to sort out successful business models before being sunk by illegal file-sharing or other forms of “free”.
Another reason is that it is nowadays impossible to argue, as many used to, that there is a purely market-based solution to piracy. The music industry has led the field with new models for consumers – there are over 470 digital music services worldwide, many of them “free-to-consumer” sites such as Spotify and We7. None of these services has much hope of long- term success while competing in a world where, according to IFPI, 95 per cent of all music downloads are illegal.
For some years, “fighting free with free” seemed the answer to all our problems. Today, that honeymoon is over. Spotify, in many countries the champion of the free-to-consumer music streaming service, is now cutting back on its free offering. It is trying to migrate its fans into payers, offering a £10 monthly subscription. That is a huge challenge.
Like newspapers which have hastened to erect website pay walls they prematurely abandoned years ago, the music industry has discovered an inconvenient truth – “free” does not really pay. It cannot sustain the artist royalties, the copyright fees and the investment that makes the artist’s career possible in the first place.
And that is the fundamental problem – who will fund the future of music? This is not an issue that directly affects a band like U2, of course. Yet I still don’t see a clear answer to the question I asked in my maiden “ISP speech” three years ago – in a world of 95 per cent piracy, where is the investment going to come from to fund the next generation of bands such as U2 and Coldplay?
The answer to me is clear. A thriving music business needs a fair, responsible environment to work in, and ISPs, the internet's gatekeepers, hold the key to this. By the graduated response approach and other measures like systematically blocking infringing websites they can significantly reduce digital piracy. Surveys, the latest by Hadopi in France in May, prove what should be obvious: that when people see rules protecting copyright being enforced, they actually change their behaviour.
No one expects teenagers brought up in the age of Limewire to convert overnight to legal download sites. Yet the migration to legitimate ways of enjoying music, respecting copyright owners, will happen over time.
The ISP agreement in the US is good news for music and the creative industries. It is time now for action elsewhere. In Europe, Commissioner Barnier is reviewing EU copyright enforcement rules for the digital age. This is a chance for Europe to use its legislative clout to get ISPs to cooperate.
Other governments have long been debating their own approaches. Now is the time to stop the thumb-twiddling and the soul-searching. ISPs need to be active partners, not bystanders, in shaping a legitimate internet where artists and creators can be sustained by their work. In the US they have made a welcome voluntary step in that direction. Elsewhere, it will need the pressure of government and legislation to make it happen.
Paul McGuinness is the Manager of U2.
@'The Telegraph'
I really do NOT like being lectured to by millionaire, tax avoiders...how about you?
And don't worry I think U2's music is so crap that I don't even download it for free!
FACT mix 264 - Goldie
Euphony (Just For You London Kuff Mix) - Bodysnatch
Let’s Get Together - Satin Storm
LFO - LFO
Energy Flash - Joey Beltram
Voodoo Ray - A Guy Called Gerald
Krisp Biscuit - Rufige Kru
In My Soul - Internal Affairs
Killa Muffin - Rufige Kru
Find A Way - Internal Affairs
Menace - Rufige Kru
You Held My Hand (Mark Mac & Goldie Remix) - Manix & Rufige Kru
Del De Go Go - Tek 9 & Rufige Kru
Shinin’ Down On Me - Internal Affairs
Rollin Like Scottie - Rufige Kru & Agzilla De Ice
Rage - Doc Scott
I Think I’m Going Out Of My Head - Satin Storm
Download
Via
HA!
GeorgeMonbiot GeorgeMonbiot
If true that NotW was hacking 9/11 victims' phones, could Murdoch axing of paper have been to protect his US interests?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
