Last March the music industry announced they'd created a new organization tasked with trying to implement a music "piracy tax." In essence, users would pay their ISP $5-$10 a month for the right to download, copy and share as much music as they'd like without restrictions. Or at least that's the sales pitch; it's hard to believe the music industry's implementation of such a plan wouldn't have serious flaws -- the least of which being that the industry would probably have everyone paying a piracy tax, whether they pirated or not.
The idea of collective licensing is obviously not new. The EFF proposed just such a system back in 2004, but the music industry instead decided that "suing the hell out of everyone" (TM) made better business sense. In light of the group's creation, the EFF penned a guide on the right and wrong way to go about collective licensing.
The EFF believes a good system would be voluntary for users, artists and ISPs. A bad system would be little more than a Capone-esque protection racket, where you either "voluntarily" adopt the system, or get knee-capped. Knowing what you know about the music industry's tactics, which would you guess will be their approach?
