Singing Cow To Attack CBDTPA

karmawarrior writes "Gateway is launching an advertising campaign against Senator Holling's CBDTPA bill, which, apparently will include its cow mascot encouraging computer users to legally download MP3s and burn their own CDs." Wired also has a story; see Gateway's website for more, as Gateway takes a page from Apple's "Rip-Mix-Burn" playbook.

*sigh*

[Carmody]

While I think this is good news and all...

Gateway is another large company with an agenda, and ITS agenda happens to coincide with my interests, and so I think it is good news.

But really, what is the online-privacy and free-speech fight really? It is large corporations fighting each other to see which one gets to write the laws. There is a debate going on, but we are not really part of it, except as the Prize. If a divorcing couple fight over who gets to keep the Car, they aren't really worried about what the Car wants.

Finally someone realizing that consumers drive...

[T3chnomonk]

Finally someone realizing that consumers drive the economy and that we want to be able to listen to music on our computers, rip CDs and burn them. Making your own compilation CD is legal and cool. Why the record and movie dorks keep trying to squeeze more out of us and give us less I don't know, but maybe this will start a wave of companies fighing for the freedom to give us what we want and will FREAK'EN PAY FOR.

Talking cow commercial

[Anonymous Coward]

Last night my brother was watching FX when this commercial came on. I watched it, and was amazed to see it, but this only hit me as important, while my brother didn't care.

The point that I'm making is that now, even with commercials made to reach everybody, the mainstream still doesn't really know what the CBDTPA even is.

We need more companies echoing this line

[cygnusx]

From the article:

The spot, a continuation of the company's campaign, features CEO Ted Waitt and a bovine companion driving into the sunset singing a cover version of Gordon Lightfoot's "Sundown" by hip-hop artist Elwood.

As Waitt and the cow trade verses, messages appear on the screen that read, "Like this song? Download it for free on gateway.com...or load it on an MP3 player. Gateway supports your right to enjoy digital music legally."

Emphasis mine. Way to go, Gateway! Just what we need -- a few more high profile companies to echo this particular line. First Apple, then Gateway. Maybe if the moneybags at IBM and Intel stepped into the game, this war could be considered won. But (sigh!) they're too busy planning copy-protected processors and hard disks to actually think of the consumer :-(.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Editorials

[Misch]

For those of you keeping score at home, here's another one for the opposition of CBDTPA (or whatever they're calling it today)

This one from eWeek [eweek.com]

enjoy

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

More FUD from the RIAA

[thesolo]

"If only they would devote a little bit of the millions of dollars they're spending on this ad campaign to help stop illegal downloading ... but that wouldn't help them sell more CD burners, would it," said Hilary Rosen

<sarcasm>Yes, because all CD burners are sold to make discs full of illegally downloaded music!</sarcasm>

Maybe if the RIAA would price their CDs more reasonably, actually give money to their artists, and stop the overwhelming and unnecessary homogenization of the music which they promote to (read: push on) the public, people wouldn't be so inclined to download music.

Re:Uh, launching?

[Kiaser Zohsay]

This is a new one. Hit the video at Gateway's site. Same cow, same Ted, same truck, but a with a different song. The dig at the Holling's bill is new too.

The song itself is available for download as an MP3 too.

Actually, when I first saw the "Whip It" version, I thought Gateway might be trying a "get them while they're still legal" type of thing. But this is way cooler.

Re:emusic?

[Nurlman]

Emusic.com is one of the first companies to Get it Right(tm).

They've struck deals with artists and/or labels to provide subscirbers with unlimited downloads of good-quality, non-crippled mp3's. Subscribers pay in the ballpark of $15 a month, and royalties get paid to labels out of those funds based on the number of downloads a track has.

The doenside is that their catalog is sketchy, since only those labels willing to offer their wares up on such an expirmental basis participate. They Might Be Giants are one of the biggest names, making almost their entire catalog available. There are also some offerings from Elvis Costello, Matador Records, and a few other prominent names, along with lots of people you've never heard of, but who are cross-referenced to similar, well-known bands, allowing easy sampling of content suitable to your tastes.

Even if their offerings are only mildly interesting to you, I encourage you to subscribe for a few months. Success by emusic.com might help open the eyes of the bigger labels to an online business model that actually works.

Template letter for elected officials

[bubblegoose]

I found a link for a form letter http://www.digitalconsumer.org/fax.html

As a constituent and an ardent consumer of digital media, I write today to urge you to support a Consumer Technology Bill of Rights, and to express my concerns about the recent trend toward allowing one-sided copyright laws to eliminate my Fair Use rights.

Historically, our country has enjoyed a balance between the rights of copyright holders and the rights of citizens who legally acquire copyrighted works. Generally speaking, rights holders have the exclusive right to distribute and profit from artistic works. Consumers like me who legally acquire these works are free to use them in most noncommercial ways. Unfortunately, this balance has shifted dramatically in recent years, much to the detriment of consumers.

To prevent further erosion of my rights, I would like to add my voice to DigitalConsumer.org in calling for a "consumer technology bill of rights". It is simply an attempt to assert positively the public's personal use rights. These rights are not new; they are historic rights granted in previous legislation and court rulings that have over the last four years been whittled away.

Under the guise of "preventing illegal copying" I believe Hollywood is vilifying their customers - people like me - and using the legislative process to create new lines of business at my expense. Their goal is to create a legal system that takes away my long-cherished personal use rights and then to charge me an additional fee to regain those rights!

Copy protection, especially to prevent overseas piracy for illicit sale, is an important issue. But before Congress considers yet another change in the law at the behest of the copyright holders, I urge you in the strongest possible terms to protect my Fair Use rights.

Thank you very much for your attention to this important matter.

Re:whatever

[Dark Paladin]

My understanding is that unless they state in the email "this is for private communications, blah, blah, blah", it's fair game.

IANAL, of course.

Re:What ticks me off...

[Rogerborg]

• "piracy" [is] an improper usage of an emotionally loaded word

Unfortunately, it's a perfectly proper usage, according to both Merriam-Webster [m-w.com] and Dictionary.com [dictionary.com].

• the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright [Merriam-Webster]
• The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material: software piracy. [Dictionary.com]

No, I don't like it either, and use "sharing" by preference. But the usage has changed right under our noses.

Real Player Version of Commercial

[Mong0]

Get the real player version of the commercial here. Here [filmcore.net]