<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by audiogirl:<BR><STRONG>Time for a little radio-activism.<P>As I write this, I'm wondering if the government will one day require me to pay Webster's dictionary for each word I use.
<P>People, before your right to e-mail is revoked, please let the copyright office and your representatives know how you feel about this proposal that will kill internet radio.</STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hi,<BR>I sent the following to the Copyright Bureaucrats:<BR>"PLEASE DO NOT KILL INTERNET RADIO!<BR> <BR>The Internet radio has a very important function. In many places, the choice of radio stations on the air is very poor and limited, and the possibility to listen over Internet has considerably improved the situation in such areas. I suppose that you, probably living in Washington area, do not think about such things very deeply, but for many others it is very important! Also, it makes America reach shorter with information and viewpoints: if the american internet radio stations are closed, emissions from other countries will take over. I fear that the quality will be inferior, and that anti-american attitudes will be more widely spread."<BR> <BR>I will give some further comments to this:<BR> <BR>Copy-right issues concerning music and TV are up for re-evaluation, and the industry will be able to take care of itself, without having to recurse to rigid out-dated copyright laws. Let the industry find its ways without hurting American interests, they are fully capable of this!<BR>Lave Fischer"<BR> <BR>There are many good arguments not to support the rich media industry in their struggle against the development, and I think that you should present some, not just your own survival!!!<BR>a. The rich industry is fighting a loosing battle for outdated copyright rules, that cannot be upheld when conditions have changed so dramatically. To try to uphold them will just delay the necessary change in the industry.<BR>b. Any attempt to "punish" transfer of music or films over the internet will just transfer the activity to other countries, and diminish the American voice in the world,<BR>c. Internet has made very much to even out the differences in the cultural environment between densely populated areas and countryside. Trying to curb the emissions over the Net, or to control the Net, will strike hardest against already culturally handicapped rural areas.<BR>d. As usual, rigid bureaucrats, putting their cold hand over developping technologies, gives other countries, with less red tape, an advantage in technology and expreinece of how it can be used. It may be impossible for America to recover lost ground.<BR>e. The argument that artists and publishers must be paid to get an incentive to produce, is not just. In the present situation, artists, record companies, film makers (and software producers) earn much more than necessary, and they will find other ways to earn their money. Maybe they will not earn as much, but certainly enough to continue to florish (which is of course important). Do not curb broadcasting and copying, that has a very important function!<BR> <BR>So, taking a stand for the rich against the less rich (you are probably not poor, though), authorities will do America and americans a major disservice.<BR>Regards,<BR>Sarcyn