hispamp3

Mira tu que bien…: Yo quiero que me pongan una entre la máquina d tabaco y la del café, así lo hago todo d un viaje, jejeje.

A ver si ‘algunos’ toman nota (:

Yo la kiero tb con dvd: Aunq me cueste mil pelas… pero si eso copiara dvds… entonces no digo na, me saco la tarifa plana del intercast ese por tres mil pelas al mes y me saco una peli al dia y a grabar se ha dicho, ale ale, naaaa, tardo señores!

A ver si los desprendidos señores de la SGAE se estiran un poco y nos dejan hacer nuestras copias de seguridad!! xD

hala tu dios pa australia jajjajajajajjajaja P)

Qué país tomará la iniciativa?: Excelente idea, ésa de los australianos. Ahora bastaría complementarla con esta otra:
Que algún país influyente del Globo tomara la iniciativa de dictar una ley que prohiba el cobro por cualquier software cuya función sea la de “Sistema Operativo”. Un ordenador no puede funcionar sin éste y debería considerárselo como parte indispensable.

Solo Audio Se podra piratear?: me quedo esa duda..
en todo excelente idea!!!
asi terminan los vendedores de la calle!
)

si esto se lleva a cabo, propongo …: que el Audiogalaxy se instale en Australia Wv

¿Es la máquina que inventó hace poco un Valenciano?: Porque si es así DUPLICA ABSOLUTAMENTE TODO

Creo que alguien debería aprender la diferencia…: Entre piratear y duplicar cd’s

A ver si cuidáis los titulares: Eso es perfectamente “legal”, y no pirateo. En España un Tribunal acaba de legalizar la máquina de los valencianos y dentro de poco podremos hacer copias “legales” de cd’s, igual que los australianos. O sea, que cuando déis una noticia, procurad que no se os vea tanto el plumero.:((:((:((

Y las discograficas q han dicho?: : D Pq la Sociedad General de Derechos d Autor de Australia esta clara q hace el negocio un 6% de los beneficios. Y por la cara. P)

tu eres tonto fredy:

respuesta de la sociedad de autores australiana (en ingles – lo siento): An article ran in a number of the Australian News Limited papers earlier this week titled “CD pirates in from the cold”. This article grossly misrepresents the truth and publishes extracts from a confidential letter for which the journalist concerned did not bother to contact us for comment.

The article has referred to the kiosks as “CD-pirating”. That is simply not the case. There is nothing covert about the operation of the machines, as the distributor has approached ARIA and AMCOS for licences. Those, in our experience, are not the characteristics of a pirate operation. Moreover, the notion of CD kiosks has been around – and trialled – in numerous contexts – with licences having been granted, in the past. The fundamental point to make is that an activity involving the use of copyright material is not illegal if it is licensed. Isn’t that the whole point of copyright generally, and collecting societies in particular?

Comments – unsourced – have also been made that in choosing to license rather than pretend it isn’t happening, we are in some way working contrary to the global fight against music piracy. These unnamed sources are presumably the same people who believe that the industry must adopt immutable business models in the face of inevitable change.

There are a number of other points that bear consideration.

The legal position in Australia – based on current advice – is that the only people against whom an action for copyright infringement is available in the context in which the kiosks operate – are the consumers who use the machines, i.e. the general public. Both AMCOS, and presumably the record companies, are reluctant in the extreme to sue members of the general public for copying CDs for private and domestic use.

The distributor of the machines has suggested to us that it would secure licences on behalf of consumers on a voluntary basis. The practical alternative to granting a licence in such circumstances is to pretend that the machines aren’t operating and to secure zero return for composers and publishers. We think that would be a stupid and illogical response.

If an individual consumer approaches AMCOS for a licence for private and domestic copying, we have always granted such a licence.

Our approach to these forms of services is entirely consistent with our position that Australia should introduce a home-copying levy. While one is commercial and the other domestic – any trial licence that may eventuate and the proposed levy seek to provide a royalty stream for the copying of music copyrights that we cannot otherwise monitor or enforce. One would presume that the overall return on a per track basis would be greater from a commercial application like this than from a home record levy!

To reiterate, no agreement has yet been put in place with the distributor, indeed the detailed terms of any proposal have not been discussed. Contrary to the ridiculous press report in the Herald Sun, we are only in negotiations with the distributor and have made it clear that any licence granted will be for a limited, trial period.