Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Music Media The Almighty Buck Businesses Your Rights Online

Internet Blackout Threat for Music Thieves in AU 244

Posted by Zonk
from the that-seems-a-little-harsh dept.
An anonymous reader writes "News.com.au is reporting that the ARIA [Australia's Version of the RIAA] is making plans to have ISPs cancel or terminate the accounts of those who download music illegally. If the user is on dialup, that's not a problem: their telephone line will be disconnected. 'Fed up with falling sales, the industry — which claims Australians download more than one billion songs illegally each year — has been discussing tough new guidelines with internet service providers (ISPs) since late last year. The music industry is lobbying for a three strikes and you're out policy to enforce their copyright. Under this system, people who illegally download songs would be given three written warnings by their Internet service provider. If they continued to illegally download songs, their internet account would be suspended or terminated.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Internet Blackout Threat for Music Thieves in AU

Comments Filter:
  • by Ckwop (707653) * <Simon.Johnson@gmail.com> on Saturday April 14, 2007 @01:37PM (#18732903) Homepage

    Why would ISPs agree to this? I can imagine it now, a group of ISPs implement this and then customers flock to the small ISPs who aren't big enough to warrent attention from the ARIA. Faced with a slump in revenue the ISPs reverse course and try to win customers back.

    Let's not get started on SSL encrypted DCC transfers on IRC channels or private FTP servers! That's going to be almost impossible to track. These kind of darknets (as I've seen them called) or going to be very hard to shut-down!

    Does this even matter anyway? My friend from Canada brought over his personal collection on a 320Gig drive when he visited this week. This is getting more and more common, people now have so much portable storage that it's often easier to swap collections and cherry pick the songs you like (or take the whole collection if you prefer). Compared to downloading, this is a far safer way to pirate on a huge quantity of music.

    At some point, their revenues will become so small that they start to lose credibility. A case in point, where are the blacksmiths' guilds today? This whole issue with trundle on for some time to come but the inevitable will eventually happen. Time is on our sides, my friends.

    Simon

    • by PPH (736903) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:04PM (#18733133)

      Why would ISPs agree to this? I can imagine it now, a group of ISPs implement this and then customers flock to the small ISPs who aren't big enough to warrent attention from the ARIA. Faced with a slump in revenue the ISPs reverse course and try to win customers back.

      I'm not familiar with Australian law. Perhaps there are no 'safe haven' provisions w.r.t. copyright enforcement and its either play netkop or be sued by the copyright owners.


      Let's not get started on SSL encrypted DCC transfers on IRC channels or private FTP servers! That's going to be almost impossible to track. These kind of darknets (as I've seen them called) or going to be very hard to shut-down!


      Does this even matter anyway? My friend from Canada brought over his personal collection on a 320Gig drive when he visited this week. This is getting more and more common, people now have so much portable storage that it's often easier to swap collections and cherry pick the songs you like (or take the whole collection if you prefer). Compared to downloading, this is a far safer way to pirate on a huge quantity of music.


      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a package of DVDs going down the highway in a FedEx truck


      The copyright folks are shooting themselves in the foot with this ISP nonsense. Its far easier to detect on-line IP theft (if transfers aren't cloaked in some way) than it is to intercept other means of transfers. This makes me think that the service termination threat might be a scare tactic. As with most intelligence gathering efforts, you don't advertise your methods to your target so they can employ countermeasures. Perhaps a few people will get their access discontinued because their kid downloaded a few songs. No doubt, it will be for a relative ly minor infraction, since that enhances the fear factor more so than going after the major violators. The event will be highly publicized, with sobbing parents on TV and the smaller violators will be discouraged. The bigger ones have more vested in their opreration and will be more likely to employ countermeasures.

    • by shmlco (594907)
      "My friend from Canada brought over his personal collection on a 320Gig drive ... Compared to downloading, this is a far safer way to pirate on a huge quantity of music.'

      If it came to that the labels would love it. You probably only have a few friends with whom you'd go to the time and trouble of sharing in this fashion. Heck, even if you had dozens of them that's better than the 10,000 or more "friends" you get when you torrent it.

      "Let's not get started on SSL encrypted..."

      You probably saw the article wher
      • by kdemetter (965669) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @04:03PM (#18734233)
        parasites ? How is that possible when we pay for traffic like everyone else . and please tell me why i'm not allowed to download a new Linux distro via Bittorent ?
        • by shmlco (594907)
          Why do you need to encrypt your latest Linux download?
          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by timmarhy (659436)
            thats not the point - you shouldn't need to justify privacy, ever
          • by jZnat (793348) *
            Because if I didn't, my ISP would throttle the download to dial-up speeds and I'd be lucky to finish downloading the ISO before the next version was released.
            • by shmlco (594907)
              And who is to blame for that? All of those people who swamped the web downloading Linux distributions? Or, perhaps, someone downloading somthing else?
      • Reminds me of the old days when the smelly kid still had heaps of "friends" because he had a bigger commodore game collection than anyone else at school.
      • by miskatonic alumnus (668722) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @05:39PM (#18735189)
        If it came to that the labels would love it. You probably only have a few friends with whom you'd go to the time and trouble of sharing in this fashion.

        Ahh. But, they share with a friend, who shares with a friend. Before you know it, Kevin Bacon has a copy, and then the world!
      • by Eivind (15695) <eivindorama@gmail.com> on Saturday April 14, 2007 @06:02PM (#18735403) Homepage
        Dunno about that. The thing is, it's the product of how many you swap with and how much you swap. Disc-sizes are growing exponentially to the point where atleast when it's about music (which it is in this article) you're going to be able to trivially storing huge libraries -- just on the hunch that you may be interested in a small fraction of it.

        We already see this. There's a clear trend from sharing a single song by a single artist, then to sharing a complete album by a single artist, and then onwards to sharing complete discographies of artists, aslong as discs keep growing this trend will continue. I can easily see "every-album-that-was-in-the-charts-this-year.zip" and it's not even that much of a stretch to imagine "every-album-that-was-in-the-charts-this-decade"

        For that matter, hard-disc-sizes only need to keep growing like they do for a few more years to make "every CD released in USA in the 1990ies" a completely practical thing to store and swap around.

        At 200kbps (more or less the needed bandwith for indistinguishalbe-from-cd sound for most people) one hour of music takes up 90MB. An average song perhaphs 7MB. Which means that, for example, the complete content of iTunes (the store, not the program), will take up around 7MB times 3.5 million, which is about 25TB.

        Today that's nontrivial, common discs today hold only half a TB or so, so you'd need 50 discs. But discs double in capacity (for the same price) about every 2 years, so that means it's about a dozen years until that entire library, 3.5 million songs, fit on a single standard consumer hard-disc. (yeah yeah, we don't know that the future will play out like that, but it seems a reasonable guess, even if it slowed down it's hard to imagine it'd take more than double that or so)

        If RIAA et al think they have a hard time with simple copying now, wait and see what happens when 25TB is a trivial amount of disc-space. They are *so* fucked. I'm not saying its rigth or wrong. I'm just saying it IS so.

    • If they manage to get laws passed, the ISP's dont have much choice in the matter.
    • The flaw in this insane argument is that the ARIA (and the ISP) becomes responsible for anything that results from the former customer not having a telephone line.

      Did I read this correctly? The ARIA is going to get the telephone company to permanently disconnect some poor Australian's telephone if they believe that they are downloading music? Not everyone has a cell phone or will be getting a cell phone. What about the lawsuits that happen against them when a child dies because there wasn't
    • cherry pick the songs you like (or take the whole collection if you prefer). Compared to downloading, this is a far safer way to pirate on a huge quantity of music.

      This is the way Zune should have gone (of course it wouldn't). But imagine turning your media player into a trade box with the addition of wifi or some simple high b/w protocol. Everyone meets up at a party with one of these, and they can swap to their heart's content (storage is an issue, maybe in two years we'll be seeing 50GB+ standard). It

  • by yagu (721525) * <yayagu.gmail@com> on Saturday April 14, 2007 @01:37PM (#18732909) Journal

    Maybe this is okay and/or legal in AU. Is this legal in the US? What about due process? What about overdue process?

    Anecdotally, as an aside, I had on my mind about three artists (new artists, e.g., Paolo Nutini), and hence, three cds I set out to find and purchase. Circuit City, no dice (didn't really plan on buying there what with their recent employee abuse program) -- they had about 1/4 the number of racked cds than last time I'd looked there. Best Buy, sorry. And the local CD store, nope! No selection, nothing. I don't know which came first the chicken or the egg, I don't even know which is which, but my thirst for new music is about the same as before -- but recently I'm finding I can't buy cds as before.

    I'm not buying the "pirates decrease sales" spiel. My cause and effect for buying fewer cds is strictly the continued unavailability of cds on display. It used to be a smörgåsbord, now the stores look like the cutout bins of years past. This (the RIAA, and others) is an industry that rather than weather a business model storm and changing business dynamics to adapt continues to insist on taking their ball home with them (hey, it isn't even their ball!) so we can't play. And somehow, they still want to demand we pay them. Please, please, please!, just let them become irrelevant quickly so we can get on with our music!

    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      We don't need due process in the US. The Patriot Act and the DMCA got rid of that pesky nuisance. You're a criminal if we say so and don't go deluding yourself thinking that we could be wrong. We have all the evidence that we need and, if we don't, we'll find it after we have you.
    • > Is this legal in the US?

      It would be legal in the US but the music publishers have no leverage on the ISP to compell them to cooperate (they would already be doing it if they could).

      > What about due process?

      It has nothing to do with due process. It does not involve government.
    • by symbolic (11752) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:42PM (#18733491)
      Ah, the ongoing saga of how to sustain a failing business model. Accuse everyone of stealing and demand a cut of the sales of other products that you *insist* are cutting into your profits. It's brilliant in a way - you never really have to be accountable for the quality of the stuff that you claim people are stealing. I wonder if the downward slide (that they claim exists anyway) might be due to the fact that it's very easy for people to gauge the quality of what's being offered *before* actually forking over their money.
    • See 17 USC 512(i) [cornell.edu] (part of the "safe harbor" provisions of the DMCA):

      The limitations on liability established by this section shall apply to a service provider only if the service provider--
      (A) has adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network of, a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network who are repeat infringers

      Sounds a

  • How... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by monkaduck (902823) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @01:40PM (#18732927)
    How could they determine what is "illegal" and what is bought from a reputable online store? Or if a band offers a download from their website, would that be flagged as well? I don't see how there couldn't be any false positives with this agenda.
    • How many reputable online stores sell music over BitTorrent? Even if they did, it's probably easier to whitelist the non-infringing trackers and assume everyone else is pirating.

      It bears mentioning that ISPs have long had the ability to shut down the overwhelming majority of P2P traffic. Every time they do, there's a big public outcry until they stop.
  • by redelm (54142) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @01:43PM (#18732949) Homepage
    Sounds mostly like a "trial balloon", an idea floated up without any real expectation it will be implemented. Perhaps for scare value. The logic is quite erronious: labels have been losing sales not due to competition/substitution from downloads, but from a lack of new, fresh product to sell. They've cut their A&R budgets and are milking their catalogs. Sales would drop even with zero downloading.

    In any case, the implementation is sure to be a nightmare: families with shared accounts, botnets, and false-positive identification will make enforcement difficult, even if the ISPs actually wanted to comply. Which I doubt they do. Do ISPs have "common carrier" status is *.au? If so, they will be loathe to jeopardize it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by lixee (863589)

      Sounds mostly like a "trial balloon", an idea floated up without any real expectation it will be implemented. Perhaps for scare value.
      Good point. News,com.au is part of Murdoch's empire and as such, news from there should be taken with a grain of salt.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by MichaelSmith (789609)

      labels have been losing sales not due to competition/substitution from downloads, but from a lack of new, fresh product to sell

      No kidding:

      This is despite big-selling albums from Australian Idol winner Damien Leith

      If their argument is going to be that nobody is buying our stuff despite Australian idol being on TV then they are truely stuffed. To be honest I don't know of anybody who bothers with P2P. Its easier to buy the CD and rip.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by NoMaster (142776)

      The logic is quite erronious: labels have been losing sales not due to competition/substitution from downloads, but from a lack of new, fresh product to sell. ... Sales would drop even with zero downloading.

      Actually, even that is erroneous (or, at least, not backed up by the facts).

      A couple of days ago, ARIA were feeding the "OMFG! Illegal downloads are ruining the poor, struggling, defenceless record industry in Australia" line to the media, and the media were dutifully repeating it far and wide. But any

  • Even if it's never implemented, the mere idea that such a thing is passed as law is enough to scare away current rookie/newbie pirates.

    Until they meet their pirate friend with a 10 Tera collection of Everything Ever Published Ever, and realize that they've been scared by the the boogyman, again.

    • TFA says nothing about any new laws. The ISPs are apparantly cooperating with the music industry on this. It's got nothing to do with any new laws or government.

      Yes I know, I actually read the article. I must be new here?
      • How do you figure they are cooperating? This quote:

        We had a meeting a few weeks ago with the Internet Industry Association (about the new guidelines) but we're yet to hear back.

        says to me that the RIAA want to do something, but the ISP's really don't care.

        I can't see how this could ever get off the ground,though. The number of different ways to connect to the 'net here in Sydney is getting bigger and bigger.

        Those with dial-up internet could face having their phone disconnected

        I'd like to see how this one could be enforced.

  • Out of their mind? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I am sure the ISPs, phone companies will hurry to terminate their contracts and sources of revenues with their own customers, so that the recording industry can make more profit.
  • by pembo13 (770295) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @01:49PM (#18733007) Homepage
    Ignore the RIAA and their clones, and their artists. Stay with old music exclusively, or take the money that you would have spent otherwise, and support a local band, there must be at least one in fair distance who you like.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by BoberFett (127537)
      Your indie music suggestions works, but old music? Unless you have it on a wax cylinder, chances are that's locked up by copyright and the RIAA members as well. Keep in mind that copyright has been extended retroactively.
  • I own almost 400 CD's and didn't want to go through the hassle of ripping all of them, so I downloaded a lot of them to put on my MP3 player. It was easier than having to continuously switch out CD's, and the quality of the .MP3's I download are usually better than the ones I rip. (Not to mention that many of my older CD's just don't rip properly.) How is this illegal? Or even immoral?

    Whatever....they'll never stop file-sharing and will play catch-up forever with technology-savvy individuals who are sma
    • The RIAA and other groups claim that shifting the format (from CD to mp3) constitutes a new license and therefore you need to pay again. I do the same thing as you do, especially if my girlfriend takes the CD and I haven't put it on my computer yet,
      • by cpt kangarooski (3773) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @04:55PM (#18734771) Homepage
        No they don't. They may argue that it's not a fair use (though I haven't heard that one for a while) with regard to format shifting, but that's all. Virtually no works other than computer software and internet-downloaded media are even claimed to be licensed routinely. And in fact, they aren't. I've never even heard of a regular CD in a record store where the copyright holder claimed that it was being licensed, not sold. So don't assume that everything works like software, and better yet, don't assume that anything should: EULAs are anachronistic and provide no benefit to anyone, really. The only reason they're still around, (other than to allow abuses by licensors that no one should be tolerant of) seems to be inertia.
    • It's not the MP3 per se that's illegal in this case, at least under US law. In fact, personally ripping an MP3 from a CD you own is possibly (this is still not clear) illegal in the United States. Note that it's the ACT OF RIPPING that's supposedly illegal, the act of making an unauthorized copy. Just like making a direct copy of the CD (in CD-Audio format) is also supposedly illegal. Now that MP3 or CD copy may be technically "counterfeit merchandise", but OWNING it is not illegal per se. So it's really up
  • by Scrameustache (459504) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @01:51PM (#18733025) Homepage Journal
    I think that the decline of music sales coincides with the rise in internet usage not because of the terrible pirates of music, but because of porn. Bear with me, it makes sense if you think about it:

    I used to watch videos for very mediocre music, because the chicks were hot, scantily dressed, and fed this former teenager's fantasies. But today's kids don't need to buy a CD to have fap-fudder, they can get free porn with ease.

    I theorize that the so-called decline of the music industry isn't because of music pirates, as they claim, or because their music suddenly sucks (the monkeys sucked, sucking isn't new), but because they were NOT in the music of selling music, but in the business of selling sexually suggestive material.
  • 3+1=4? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Gates82 (706573)
    Doesn't sound like three strikes to me. Three written warnings and then on the next offense the services is terminated. Isn't this 4 strikes and you are out? Is this Australian baseball rules?

    --
    So who is hotter? Ali or Ali's sister?

    • by hashish (62254)
      haven't ya got it by now? Baseball is an american game, the rest of the world doesn't care for it.
  • by koreth (409849) * on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:26PM (#18733333)

    (Almost.) If a system like this were put in place and rigorously enforced, and after a year the Australian music industry still saw declining sales, it would put a pretty big nail in the coffin of the "our industry is dying because of you filthy pirates" argument. The industry goons will not stop bleating that until it becomes such a ridiculous claim that any reasonable person reacts to it with derisive laughter instead of seriously considering it.

    If, on the other hand -- unlikely though I think it is -- their sales shot up all of a sudden, then people like me would be forced to admit we were wrong. Which honestly I'll be happy to do if there are convincing hard numbers that contradict my point of view.

    On the other hand, it's not worth causing so much trouble to so many people just to test a theory, which is why I'm only "almost" in favor of this.

  • fine if... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nanosquid (1074949) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:28PM (#18733345)
    That's fine... if ISPs are held financially responsible for the losses they cause when they disconnect someone groundlessly. Losses includes lost productivity, time spent on trying to get the service reconnected, lost business, distress, etc.
  • by fuego451 (958976) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:29PM (#18733363) Journal

    So, each Internet user [internetworldstats.com] in Australia is down loading more than 100 songs a year? Sounds like the usual hype, smoke, mirrors and bs the riaa uses in the US.

  • One Word. (Score:2, Informative)

    by greedyturtle (968401)
    PeerGuardian. Cox Cable in Florida uses the same policy. One request from any random media company and they cut off your bandwidth. Give 'em a call and they warn you that you have two more chances and then they turn off your cable. Don't ever get Cox if you have a choice... but not because of this - they just stink in general. I installed PeerGuardian2 when I got off the phone with them, and haven't had an issue since.
  • When can I get in "talks" with ISPs to change their guidelines?
  • by russotto (537200) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:43PM (#18733505) Journal
    According to TFA: "We had a meeting a few weeks ago with the Internet Industry Association (about the new guidelines) but we're yet to hear back.

    Yeah. The IIA is probably still working on getting "Sod off, wankers!" translated into legalese.
  • by morethanapapercert (749527) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @02:52PM (#18733575)
    Let's see here, ARIA is claiming >1,000,000,000 songs downloaded every year by Australians. According to Wikipedia, .au has a population of 20,788,357. This results in 48 songs for every man, woman and child in Australia every year* (I can't be bothered to RTFA, how long have they been doing this?) I dunno about you, but to me that looks more like an unexploited potential market. This is even more true when you consider that not every person in Australia has an Internet connection and of those who *do* have a connection, not all choose to infringe on corporately owned copyrights by downloading music without ARIA's blessing. Based on hearsay and such, I'll make a wild guess and say it's more like ten million Aussies downloading >150 songs each per year. That's only roughly 600MB per person/account but I've heard that Australia has poor long haul connections to the rest of the world, so downloading that much from other people around the world shows a great deal of interest. Ten million music fans, all heavy consumers and the **IA can't figure out a working micro-pay/pay-as-you-go music download system?








    *For the sake of simplicity, I ignore Tasmania and the other islands, although I'm sure ARIA is counting them. I also round off the decimals

    • The recording industry making inflated, sensational, bogus claims?!? Unthinkable.
    • by zsau (266209)
      FWIW, the population of Australia includes the population of Tasmania, at least on the Wikipedia article. "Australia" usually refers to the country, not the continent.
    • Ten million music fans, all heavy consumers and the **IA can't figure out a working micro-pay/pay-as-you-go music download system?

      The problem with this is i think a great-many of the people who download a shitload of music are the unemploted, the low income earners and kids. Sure, there's probably a handfull from other demographics as well.

      Music is expensive. A CD single here can cost between $7 and $10 depending on the artist and the label. A new release CD can cost between $25 and $30, again depen

    • Taking into account broadband penetration and who can be bothered downloading music - say an overestimate of 5% of the population, then those people are downloading 1000 songs per year each. What I want to know is how the hell they can find 1000 songs worth downloading?
  • If the Aussie industry's sales are that poor, shutting down must be a viable option. Do it -- then Australia will really understand your worth.
  • Pure Scare Tactics (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gweihir (88907) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @03:14PM (#18733783)
    ''If you donload music, we will cut off your Internet'' is actually something they dearly would want to do, but it is completely infeasible on a larger scale.

    Think about it:

    (1) They cannot prevent encrypted traffic: Pople working over VPN or SSH, SSL to stores, encrypted email, etc.. Also it is difficult to really ID encrypted traffic and protocol headers can be faked.

    (2) How much bandwidth do music download take? 1MB per minute of music? Even with 28Kbps downstream, i.e. slower dial-up speed, that means a minute of music takes 40 seconds to download. Throtteling encrypted traffic is not going to help. But it will cost ISPs customers that are doing legitimate things.

    All in all this is just one more empty threat in the music industries scare tactics. Just as the others before, it will not work. And it will certainly not fix their basic problems: An outdated business model that does not fit the techological realities and a lot of bad music people are unwilling to actually pay for.

  • The RIAAs Rights (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Gastrobot (998966)
    Please don't take this post as being unloving on my part. I know I disagree strongly with the opinions of many people here.

    The prevalent attitude amongst this community of users seems to be that stealing music is morally acceptable because "downloading music doesn't hurt sales", "the RIAA is a bunch of jerks", "I bought the song so nobody should be allowed to tell me what I'm allowed to do with it", and/or "I can't get it anywhere else". None of these reasons justify stealing.

    Does piracy hurt sales? Maybe
  • something needs to be done about these people. I don't care what country you're talking about, or which particular flavor of the RIAA you have to contend with. Something needs to be done before these assholes bring the roof down on all of us.
  • by sien (35268) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @06:57PM (#18735813) Homepage
    In Australia, CD sales are 8% up [smh.com.au]. So even when the internet is encouraging people to listen to new music, that they are buying, the record industry wants to shut it down.

    It just goes to show, copyright holders are determined to extend their legal rights at every opportunity, regardless of whether their industry is being helped or hindered.

  • Some of the so-called facts in TFA are a bit dodgy.

    People who illegally download music would have their telephone and internet services cut off under a radical new plan proposed by the music industry.

    About 80% of ISP end-users in Australia are using an ISP that is a different company to their telephone services provider. ARIA would have legal problems getting telephone services cut-off as well due to the requirement for Telstra(/rebadged phone provider) to provide emergency services capability to all land

  • How will Australian ISPs know when one of their clients is a music thief? I would imagine a music thief wouldn't have access to the internet, otherwise he'd just download music instead of stealing music CDs from stores.
  • If the Australians vote in a Howard government again that would enact such a law, then they deserve this crap.

    Really - it's time that we stopped blaming lobby groups for promoting their agendas. They do what it is in their nature to do. If the people of Australia are so enamored of PM Howard and his Tories to support this sort of thing (assuming it is implemented) then they get the sort of government - and laws - that they deserve.

    Lobbyists further their own agendas. When the voter stops furthering his or
  • by trawg (308495) on Saturday April 14, 2007 @09:13PM (#18736991) Homepage
    ...titled "CD sales rise despite downloads", right here [smh.com.au]:

    AS DIGITAL music hogs the headlines, the humble CD has made a comeback at the cash register. However, music retailers may still be feeling the pinch. Figures released by the Australian Recording Industry Association yesterday show an increase of almost 8 per cent in the volume of wholesale physical music products, such as CDs, in 2006 compared with 2005, despite a decrease of more than 5 per cent in overall revenue.
  • would you title a story about bush protestors "pinko commie liberals erode national security"?

    would you title a story about anti-abortion republicans "fascist corporate schills demand an end to women's rights"?

    then why the heck is this story about civil disobedience to controversially overreaching copyright laws entitled "internet blackout threat for music thieves"?

Aren't you glad you're not getting all the government you pay for now?

Working...