I read via The Consumerist that EMI is trying to block music lovers from backing up their music to an online storage service at MP3Tunes. Now, from what I’m reading, the service MP3Tunes provides isn’t a fanciful view of file sharing - it’s actually a secure file storage service.
However, EMI are mounting a legal challenge because the service allegedly breaches copyright laws.
Right, we don’t give a stuff about EMI. That’s a given. As a consumer, you want music in a format that’s convenient to you. And with the rise of the MP3 and a generation of iPod users, listeners prefer digital.
Now, anyone who’s had a bad experience with a computer can tell you that they’re fragile. Viruses, hard drive failures and idiots can all conspire to delete an entire library of MP3s that have taken years to accumulate. A backup plan is essential if you want to keep your data safe.
There’s a great quote in Exchange Magazine about this:
Content owners have rights, but those should not extend to shutting down music storage websites that are not abetting copyright infringement. And nothing is stopping EMI from developing its own digital locker service. That a Web startup dreamt up an innovative business model to complement consumers’ busy lifestyles is no cause for judicial intervention.
MP3Tunes is neither facilitating piracy nor discouraging people from buying music in any way. In fact, by making music collections more accessible and therefore more valuable, MP3Tunes might actually cause people to buy more music.
OK, from another perspective, I can see how an account on MP3Tunes could allow people to share logins and therefore share files over the service. However, if EMI were to work with MP3Tunes, they could easily detect abuse of an account. Simultaneous logons from different locations, IP addresses, etc. Not a problem.
Unfortunately in the context of the recording industry’s long-running feud with the Internet, this latest case looks like yet another reason to see the major labels as a draconian money machine looking to protect it’s own interests as opposed to those of the customer.
Another voice in this issue is the man behind MP3Tunes, Michael Robertson. He writes clearly about the situation and questions the right of the record labels to invade their customers’ privacy:
Files are not MP3tunes’ possessions any more than the contents of a safety deposit box are owned by the bank that houses them. The storage provided by MP3tunes is the user’s own space. A Locker is empty when someone opens an account and that customer decides what files are placed into their Locker.
It certainly raises questions about the rights of the consumer when dealing with music they’ve bought. If you’ve had a hard drive failure, does the record company expect you to buy every MP3 again? That’s simply not realistic. If I’ve purchased the music, then surely I’ve got the right to insure against losing it?
The problem is, record companies are so busy trying to protect their precious copyrights these days that there’s virtually no legal way to listen to music unless it’s on the original CD. Customers like me are confused and concerned by the attitude of record companies to customers. I think it’s high time they stopped suing us and started listening to us!
What about you?
