Carter is no fool -- but this shows he ain't a prophet, either.

All the new laws and initiatives we see across the world right now will kill mainstream piracy.

Like the 6 strikes and nothing happens policy? Unlikely.

Giving people what they want is what will ultimately kill piracy. People want convenience at an affordable price. Rhapsody, Rdio, and Spotify can deliver that.

Piracy has gone down in the US because of legal services that take inspiration from piracy. Nothing changed with laws to do this.

6 strikes and a lot happens, my friend...

No, it really doesn't. Sure, you have to answer little quizzes and be "educated" but beyond that.... Only a couple providers agreed to place you on some sort of probation, which restricts your access for a limited amount of time. But after you hit 6 strikes, what happens? Well they don't cut you off and they don't keep bugging you. So I would say after 6 strikes, nothing happens.

"Fifth Alert: At this time, the ISP may take one of several steps, specified in its published policies and the alert itself, reasonably calculated to stop future copyright infringement.  These steps, referred to as “Mitigation Measures,” may include, for example: temporary reductions of Internet speeds, redirection to a landing page until the subscriber contacts the ISP to discuss the matter or reviews and responds to some educational information about copyright, or other measures that the ISP may deem necessary to help resolve the matter.  The ISP may decide to waive the Mitigation Measure at this point – but it would be applied if a further notice of copyright infringement associated with the same subscriber’s account is received."

[italics mine]

Source:

http://www.copyrightinformation.org/alert

Yes... but it is temporary and only happens if the ISP agrees to do so. Ultimately it does nothing to stop piracy because it only for a short time then the flood gates open again. And it definitely won't stop those from cracking a neighbor's WEP password and torrenting on their internet.

No, it's not temporary, and yes it is indeed going to close the gates.

What you don't understand is that it is designed to stop mainstream piracy. You can never reach the criminals who spend all their time (and money) on piracy, but you can easily stop ordinary people from stealing. And this is the way to do it.

You also shouldn't underestimate the value of the education initiative. People simply don't know anything about copyright, piracy and Intellectual Property. Just look at these pages...

Yes, it is temporary. It even says so right in the definition you provided. "temporary reductions of Internet speeds, redirection to a landing page until the subscriber contacts the ISP to discuss the matter or reviews and responds to some educational information about copyright." All temporary.

You completely miss the point of the 6 Strikes package:

1) ISPs can use any other measure than those announced by CCI to solve a particular problem, and...

2) ISPs are required to share pirates' personal information with copyright holders in case of subpoenas or court orders.

I'm sure you can see the significance of that!

Free stuff!

So what's the difference Troy?  Lot of people say Spotify is really not different than LimeWire.

... these people don't have any real idea of what they're talking about.

Is it a music service's aim to try and get the horse that has already bolted back into its stable?

No. Artists that want either $10 or nothing per album should avoid these services accordingly.

Is it a music service's aim to monetize music in a way that affords a user experience that draws people away from pirate sites?

Yes. Its starting to work too.

While they're all in the early stages, hundreds of millions of dollars are flowing back to rights owners already each year, and the scene is growing very very fast.

Bear in mind, if one streaming service gets 7 million subscribers in the US- it'll pay out more to content owners than iTunes currently does. 

What gets distributed and where once that money eventually hits the record company bank accounts is no different at all to when a piece of vinyl, casette, CD or MP3 is paid for.

They're called record companies not record charities for a reason.

Swift killed Spotify.

Show me a label/artist that'll say:

"Mm, let's see... Ms. Swift avoided Spotify and sold more than anybody else, let's do the opposite!"

The major labels.... There is no evidence that cutting streaming had anything to do with it. Everyone knows Taylor Swift is immensly famous. They also know that sales have on several accounts, increased in the US since Spotify went active. And Spotify brings in some serious cash for the major labels. So it is unlikely they will follow along.

By all means, suit yourself. 

I won't take any chances though, so I'll follow Ms. Swift's example -- no streaming here, thank you very much.

good luck. as the previous poster said, swift is immensely famous. follow suit and still sell nothing. 

Huh? You work for Spotify?

I'm sure streaming will remain popular among hobbyists but it's over for professional artists, thanks to Ms. Swift.

The Commons is a name for a growing body of free content spinning around the Internet. This is content that is licensed in a way that encourges sharing freely

This is like advocating mass suicide as a way to reduce the murder rate.

There you have it! :)

Gaga is famous because her label promoted her to radio. The label promoted her because they wanted record sales. What Troy Carter is advocating is absence of record labels after the fact they were the real reason for success.

Without record label support any longer, Gaga's new music won't be played on popular radio and she won't receive much mainstream news attention.

Gaga and team want to screw up-and-coming artists by eliminating a system after they have benefited from it.

Ignorance is bliss.

@ Yves Villeneuve

well said. put there's a bigger picture with piracy, and it's about advertising dollars - paid to illegally operating and completely infringing sites.

and the sad part is, this starts right in the mainstream, on the mainstreet of Madison Avenue.

http://thetrichordist.com/2012/11/05/madison-avenue-and-media-piracy-are-online-ad-networks-the-birth-of-skynet/

Free stuff will ultimately kill piracy?

Free cars will also stop auto-theft. 

Even if what Carter suggests is trust (which I do not think it is) the logic seems absurd: to combat piracy we should instead just give our stuff away for free?? Since when it that a legitimate business model? I understand his perspective is skewed; he works for one of the most famous women of this generation, a woman who is so contantly photographed, interviewed, blogged about that she is nearly impossible to avoid! However, lets imagine for one second that we are dealing with an artist who is not at the level of hyper fame that Lady Gaga has managed to obtain. Would giving away their work then be reasonable? How would you they afford to make any additional music when they do not have "touring, branding and high end merchandise" upon which to fall back? I see the point that Carter is trying to make, that the music industry is undergoing a similar transformation that many other industries have gone through to adapt to modern times. But we have to ask ourselves: as part of the auto industry's adaptation (which he sites as an example of his veracity) did we encourage people to give cars away for free to prevent them from being stolen? Did we allow blatant law violations to go on because we knew that "eventually" it would become unnecessary? Its true that businesses are almost constantly changing and evolving but we need to be wary of drawing correlations that aren't nearly as poignant as we initially think.  

It's so good to see that more and more people share your view!

Only a few artists dared to talk about theft until very recently.

But suddenly we have this new trend that it's OK to stand up and say:

"I work as hard as anybody else, and I insist on getting paid if you want my stuff!"

I think the Piracy Industry is facing a very tough time...