Children, Creativity and Culture - When CopyRight = CopyWrong

I was asked to post this in English - it is a computerized translation from the original Norwegian text

When risks, dangers and security related to children's use of the internet are discussed, none speak about the ©-Trolls ...

A slightly inattentive user, particularly children and young people, can quickly get themselves into a situation of copyright infringement - without any awareness of the situation. It is quicker (unconsciously) than some authorities might have been misled to believe. In other words, the entertainment industry has not adapted to digital media and particularly poorly adapted to consumer needs. I would argue they do not serve artists - neither our common cultural landscape.


Netiquette?

It gave a minor revelation to explain the illogical to , normally intelligent and logical thinking, children.
The digital copyright law is not logic, not fair for the artists, it scares away consumers while favouring an excessive third party that operates as a parasite on our creativity and our common culture.


Sanity-check

We start with what we have; Camera for photos, PC with licensed software, music - all bought and paid for, including taxes, VAT and additional taxes of the taxes.

What we own, we usually has the ownership of. Or at least the right to usage.
We do believe.
For the time being.

It is reasonable that children think that what one has acquired, can be share with others. Good citizens, empathy, giving from their surplus to share with those who do not have - to share experiences with friends ...
Sharing is not stealing:

But cyberspace is not safe for ©-Trolls.
We start therefore with the Copyright 101 for YouTube. Scary - it aims at killing all creativity in the first place (?)

Scare tactics are no good educational tool, one might get nightmares of less.
(I take a note that I must ask the ACTA Ministry for information materials for children ... eh .. and for adults)

Next phase:

After such an introduction of netiquette dedicated the ©-Troll, the digital creativity has reached a low point ...

But the next phase is more fun. Like playing with digital Lego™ - no restrictions what is (not) allowed to do with the building blocks.
Do we believe.
For the time being.

We will experiment with our own photos to create a scrapbook for friends and family.
The housecat is sacrificed as it has no concerns for face recognition or ID-tagging. It has both a Facebook account with 'real name', e-ID implant and its own blog.

(Click on photo for larger version)
 

Everything goes smoothly until we come to selecting the music:
A <click>  on the "♫" and the household's music library is displayed. Including the track we want as background music for the cat's scrapbook.


Do we have permission?

Surely kids want to show off what they've created, share their creative experiences, share memories, share with friends, share with classmates and family. The homemade video is for the cat's blog ...

For the music track selected, it has no information related to contacts or usage information.
After some research and some coincidences, I find that the artist is Norwegian and is within TONO's domain.
After further search I find email address for TONO/Norway - and send a request for information related to the correct procedure to follow:

TONO,

After some research I found your contact information from this address (www.tono.no).

The case is as follows:
I have purchased music (iTunes), a Norwegian artist; <artist name + track>

I bought this particularly for usage as background music for a short video I made ​​for/with children -
and which (the video clip) shows the kids cat friend.

Now I want to add this video clip on a private website (a "blog").
I have tried to find the artist, to obtain permission (for a fee).

How do I proceed?
What is the cost?
If I pay to TONO, how much (of this) is the artist paid?

I hope you can help - it's not very easy to teach children about "©"....
but give it a try...

Regards,

The following day I receive information for the minimum price (~40€ (300NOK) + price per. streamed minute), as well as a name for the responsible person.
After some communication with the new contact person, he instructs me to contact EMI Sweden.
Some more communication and several days later, no responses materialized ...
I have not received response to reminders ...

Meanwhile, I gave this some thoughts and reflected how much I was willing to pay for this experiment, and (in my mind) I thought maximum 130€. How much is one willing to pay to educate children about the ©-Troll?

I also reflected on how I can measure the number of "streaming minutes" if I were to get permission to use the music track.
This will be a technical challenge as there is no functionality giving this information.
The potential (and theoretically possible) procedure would require that the blog is moved to a private server and the downloading of spyware to those who read the blog and watch the video.
Another possibility might be to count the "number of hits", but those numbers also includes the surveillance  (each blog post results in activities and "hits" from certain countries, on both sides of the Atlantic) and does not be related "streaming minutes."
I was anxious to learn how this was measured.

I am still anxious to learn more about this ...

And I am still waiting information for how a consumer can - legally - purchase music for personal use.


It took a few minutes to put together the video.
But it takes hours, days, weeks, months ... to get permission to pay further more to use music already paid for ...
If one ever gets any response ...
What kind of legal business practice is this?

What does one teach children about this?
That copyright = copy wrong - because we have incompetent politicians?


While we wait:

We find music from Free Music Archive so the video can be shared with others, and this time not the cats blog, but here:

In the meantime an (Norwegian) artist lost income ...
What does the Ministers of ACTA/SOPA/IPRED/Lex© do about this?
Measurement of "streamed Minutes"?


The Minister of Culture?

Should not artists have the rights to sell their works to consumers?
And the rights of consumers? Kids?

The technology has, by large, made the middlemen redundant, so they are using all means, whatever stupid.... - while the politicians make themselves available as puppets in the game of strangle artists income, consumers' rights, creativity, our common culture and human rights.


Updated Jan.2012

4 months later .... and I have still no response from my inquiry, but read that the ©-Troll cheat the artists for large amounts. I am not surprised ... :
Feeling cheated from TONO-money

Recommendation:
Give time to watch Lawrence Lessig on IP (intellectual property) in the Digital Economy