Danish band allege collection agency blocked anti-ACTA gig

Interesting thing over on Boing Boing: Danish band Qu'est-ce Que Fuck had been going to play a gig protesting against ACTA. Only KODA, the royalty-collection organisation, put a bunch of stupid hurdles in their way, including an insane demand for over-the-top payments from the organisers.

Music Week brings news from Canada and Denmark

Music Week reports on a couple of surveys about unlicensed music:

The debate around P2P and its impact on music sales is never short of controversy and now two new studies have been published which reveal the extreme ends of thinking.

Eamonn Forde's piece doesn't quite live up to this eyecatching opening. Not much is "revealed" at all - indeed, one of the surveys is little more than a crunching of other survey findings.

This is done by the Canadian copyright farming industry, which looks at other surveys from between 2005 and 2008, and concludes that people who use peer to peer networks would spend an extra £110 a year on music if p2p didn't exist.

As Forde points out, looking at a survey about the internet in 2008 to draw conclusions about 2011 is flawed from the very start, and even if you can get round that problem, and except their rather elaborate extrapolation, you're still left with the basic problem that this is all "so what?"

If there weren't p2p networks, people would spend £110 more on music. Maybe. If there were no proper shoes, I would wear flipflops. If there wasn't rain, people would spend less on umbrellas. Perhaps the Canadian Intellectual Property Council might like to conduct a survey into what would happen if there were really unicorns?

The second survey is also a bit "so what":

Meanwhile, TorrentFreak is running details of a study into P2P user behaviour and ethical stances by the Rockwool Foundation Research Unit in Denmark. It found that 70% of those polled said that it was “acceptable” to source music illicitly from the web. Three-quarters, however, said they had moral objections to anyone then selling that illegally acquired music for profit.

People who use peer to peer networks don't have a problem using things like peer to peer networks to obtain music without proper licences. Excuse me while I frantically recolour my worldview.

[via @buzzsonic]

"Child pornography is great" says Danish music industry lobbyist

Michael M suggested this Boing Boing headline might be the headline of the year:

Music industry spokesman loves child porn

The story comes from Pirate MEP Christian Engstrom's website:

"Child pornography is great," the speaker at the podium declared enthusiastically. "It is great because politicians understand child pornography. By playing that card, we can get them to act, and start blocking sites. And once they have done that, we can get them to start blocking file sharing sites".

The venue was a seminar organized by the American Chamber of Commerce in Stockholm on May 27, 2007, under the title "Sweden -- A Safe Haven for Pirates?". The speaker was Johan Schlüter from the Danish Anti-Piracy Group, a lobby organization for the music and film industry associations, like IFPI and others...

"One day we will have a giant filter that we develop in close cooperation with IFPI and MPA. We continuously monitor the child porn on the net, to show the politicians that filtering works. Child porn is an issue they understand," Johan Schlüter said with a grin, his whole being radiating pride and enthusiasm from the podium.

How brilliant, eh, that kids are being raped and abused because of the upside for the record labels? Sure, if one or two of those kids might, you know, disappear, they're just collateral damage in the bigger war of keeping Bono in the manner to which he's become accustomed, right?

Interesting to discover that the music industry lobbyists are "monitoring child porn sites" - isn't that what got Pete Townshend into trouble?

Danish anti-pirate group dump lawsuits

Antipiratgruppen, a Danish intellectual property protection group, have decided that it's not worth taking people to court for using unlicensed files because, erm, they can't actually prove anything against them:

“It requires very strong and concrete evidence to have these people convicted. We simply could not lift the burden of proof,” said Antipiratgruppen lawyer Mary Fredenslund when explaining the decision to Politiken.

In just a year, four cases against alleged pirates have come before the High Court in Denmark and the overall result for the copyright holders has been negative. Three of the defendants were acquitted due to insufficient evidence, and in the one case where a file-sharer was convicted, the defendant had confessed.

There's something about Fredenslund's statement which suggests she's a bit disappointed that, in order to convict someone of something, you have to prove they've done something. Pesky old fundamental principles of natural justice, eh?

Copenhagen again for 2008?

Eurovision wouldn't be Eurovision without a tv or two, and although no cross-dresser has won the contest yet, it's not dampened the enthusiasm for transvestites at the national heat level. Denmark has become the first country to declare their hand for 2007 depending more than usual on waxing and shaving: Drama Queen.