

Music publishers: 'Copyright should be technology neutral' - edw519
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-10370513-261.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

======
jcl
_They also want online music stores to cough up fees for 30-second song
previews._

Surely such previews fall under "fair use"? They are excerpts of a larger
work, unusable except to give an idea of how the whole piece sounds. And they
don't decrease the value of the author's work -- if anything, they increase
it.

It sounds like the publishers are trying to make a short-term gain while
crippling their industry in the long run.

~~~
DarkShikari
_Surely such previews fall under "fair use"?_

The music industry has made it abundantly clear for almost 30 years (since the
early days of tapes, really) that they believe fair use does not actually
exist.

------
asciilifeform
_> "Technology should not be used to strip rights from songwriters, composers
and music publishers"_

Technologically stripping rights from music purchasers, on the other hand, is
a sacred right?

------
pierrefar
Is DRM a technology by their definition? If yes, we can twist the argument and
state that copyright doesn't need DRM because DRM is a technology.

Hey, it's a twisted hack of "logic", but it might work.

