Warner CEO Admits His Kids Stole Music

IAmTheDave writes "Warner Music CEO Edgar Bronfman admitted that he was fairly certain that one or more of his children had downloaded music illegally, but despite this direct admission of guilt, no lawsuits are pending. Surprised? Bronfman insists that, after a stern talking-to, his children have suffered the full consequences of their actions. 'I explained to them what I believe is right, that the principle is that stealing music is stealing music. Frankly, right is right and wrong is wrong, particularly when a parent is talking to a child. A bright line around moral responsibility is very important. I can assure you they no longer do that.' I wonder if all of the people currently being sued/extorted can now just claim that they 'no longer do that.'"

Re:To-MAY-to, To-MAH-to

[CheeseburgerBrown]

Once someone gets sued for downloading music from Usenet, website, or via FTP, then we can talk about how his kids should have been sued...

I suppose I wasn't sufficiently clear.

The fact that their activities were reported as downloading does not reliably imply that they were directly downloading illegally shared music (see my previous post on the ambiguation of "download"/"upload"). What I'm suggesting is that the kids likely used peer-to-peer filesharing software to "download" the material.

I say "likely" because P2P seems to be the default access point between the great unwashed and piracy. Having an account of some l33t FTP server or whatnot is less common than someone launching eDonkey or the nearest equivalent.

In other words, the odds are that the kids were uploading.

Yes, They Have

[waldoj]

I know some of his family members. Not his children, but his his sibling and two of his nieces. One of them, in fact, has downloaded music illegally on my own computer. :)

Re:Meh...welcome to Real Life

[Daemonstar]

It depends on the State. In Texas it is illegal for minors to (ABC Chapter 106):

• Purchase

• Attempt to purchase

• Consume (with exceptions, like in the presence of a parent or spouse that is of legal age)

• DWI

• Possess

• Import

• Misrepresent age

Also:

• Sell to a minor

• Purchase for/furnish to a minor

Of course there are different exceptions for different laws and circumstances (i.e.: a minor may work at a supermarket and stock alcohol-related beverages; a legal-age man can purchase alcohol with his wife who is under the drinking age limit).

actually it may have been perfectly legal

[jbr439]

Bronfman is Canadian. In Canada it is legal to download (but not necessarily upload) music. If Bronfman's kids were doing their downloading in Canada, then they were committing no offense.

It's not stealing.

[plopez]

It is copyright infringement if anything.

And it is a civil violation which must be enforced by the copyright holder.

This is probably a pointless post but remember a few things:
1) Piracy is a very specific offense and a felony. It has *nothing* to do with copyright infringement.

2) There is no such thing as intellectual property. Property has to have some sort of physical presence. Anything intellectual is by definition in a person's mind and therefore has no real physical presence. The works such as stories, plays, music etc produced by the mind can be restricted in distribution by copyright (hence copy + right). But it is *not* 'intellectual property'.

3) Stealing is a crime, unlicensed copying of copyrighted material is not.

We have been so brainwashed we think that 'music piracy' is 'stealing' and a 'crime'. It is not.

As I said. This is probably a pointless post as most people have it so deeply ingrained that there is no way to change thier minds on this.

But I may as well try.

Re:All people are equal

[Moofie]

"It is just as morally wrong to copy a book and make it available for download as it is to copy a cd."

Which is to say, "not at all morally wrong".

bootleggers

[Potor]

the bronfmans made their money bootlegging liquor. this is delicious irony.

Re: Production Costs

[TaoPhoenix]

Content... includes Video/Movies. Even if you somehow locate a cast for free, there's some serious equipment involved. Content really doesn't mean GooTube type cheeseball offerings.

Re:All people are equal

[E++99]

If the world is full of people creating music, and some do it for profit and some do it for love, what do you think will be left when the people doing it for profit leave the scene?

Um, less talented musicians?

content creation only costs money if you're trying to sell the content for a profit in today's market. Content creation on its own costs nothing but labor, and if it's a labor of love, you get emotionally paid.

Which means so much when it comes to paying a mortgage and educating and feeding your children. What if really talented musicians could actually make a living by creating music, so that they could do it all day long instead of only after they get home from their day job? Wouldn't that be better for everyone? Yes, it would.

Re:All people are equal

[shark72]

"I think the point was that we the common folk get to surrender our life savings, educations, cars homes, etc., while the CEO gets off just giving his kids a stern talkning-to (okay, he's a CEO so it qualifies as worse that the talking-to I got as a kid). "

I am not sure I understand. Cases of false identification notwithstanding, I believe it's the record industry's intention to go after the file-sharing "whales," folks who have in excess of 1,000 songs in their share directory. The article doesn't go into specifics, but the impression I got was that his kids just downloaded a few tracks. I don't think the data's there to assume otherwise.

Anyway, I wasn't aware that anybody has lost their house as a result of paying a record industry settlement. Do you have a citation? I thought the settlements were on the order of around $3.5K.

Re:All people are equal

[somersault]

I take it you haven't heard any non-talented musicians recently then. Even some really cheesy crap pop is probably better for your ears than someone who can't sing (whether they wrote the song or not, and even, or *especially* if they're singing a cover of a song you actually like). In cheesy pop songs the instruments usually *are* played by 'talented' musicians, then maybe sung by someone with an average (as far as professional singing goes) voice, and good looks (or occasionally a good voice and good looks, as in the case of Christina Aguilera and Shakira, IMO ;) ).

As a drummer in a band I can respect the precision with which some punk rock bands play. You may think it's easy to do well, but it actually takes dedication and effort to play a decently fast punk song without it turning into a slightly out of phase mess.

Re:All people are equal

[RoloDMonkey]

I don't disagree with all of your points. However, there is a "profit-driven" model for entertainment, and it does produce quite a bit of experimental material. It's called Public Broadcasting. People pay up-front how much they think next year's content will be worth, and then the producer's create that content. Not every donor likes every show, but they like some enough to support the other "experiments".