I'm also very disappointed in Billy Bragg's and Ed O'Briens involvement in this. To have what I what would call `fairly anti-establishment' artists supporting legislation that is essentially geared around controlling the means of production for the fortunate few is a very sad state of affairs. A few years ago, I remember hearing Radiohead slagging off Pink Floyd for banning a documentary which showed them in a board meeting `moving money around'. I'm a huge Radiohead (and Bragg) fan but it shows you how much society has changed that we now see Radiohead doing exactly the same thing in public and yet no one bats an eyelid.

Where are the artists who might support this possible revolution we could have in democratising music and expression for everyone? Make yourselves known please. We need to hear more from the people in this debate.

At the end of the day, everyone has 4 or 5 favourite bands/artists who they will always support financially whether by buying merchandise, seeing gigs, or physical product. This should be enough for everyone. If no one cares about your music enough to support your living, then you why should you have the right to make cash money simply because you managed to buy enough PR hype?

The new system should be completely fair and transparent. If a band want to make an album/do a tour, then they should simply publish their finances and ask their fans for the money. If the love is genuine, then they will always be a way.

Transparent finances is an ideal way to challenge the growing inequality in today's rather messed up society. Why should you be allowed to control something that I can't?

Rock'n'Roll has always pushed on us consumers the theoretical idea of revolution. Some might say that's its essential power and purpose. Well, now we want it. We really want change. We can see how it might happen and are looking to our heros and role models to direct us.

`Why not phone up Robin Hood and ask for some....wealth distribution? '

_ Joe Strummer

I guess Radiohead and Pink Floyd don''t have enough money! Better disconnect the "thieves" who download their songs...oh wait, we'll let them have email, poor things.

Billy sang this once, before he switched sides:

I don´t know good horse,
As we trot in this dark here
That robbing the rich is for worse or for best
They take it by stealing and lying and gambling
And I take it my way, my shiny Black Bess

I treat horses good and I´m friendly to strangers
I ride and your running makes my guns talk the best
And the rangers and deputies
are hired by the rich man
To catch me and hang me, my shining Black Bess

Words by Woody Guthrie
Music by Billy Bragg

..was Woody in it for the money? (I suppose they'll try to sue me for reprinting the lyrics!)

 Really, the train has left the station with this argument. Technology has destroyed the old way of doing things in the record business. That is never coming back for good or for bad. 

This coalition might show some insight and embrace the future in an imaginative way and not make its people seem quite so self-interested or simply out of touch with the groundswell by supporting a system that is being consigned to history.

Much of the contempt that rained down on Lily Allen for her blog-piece will fall on the heads of those who were party to this statement.

Are we going into a total copyright gridlock? As was put forward by Leonhard at PICNIC09 in Amsterdam this week. Yes, when looking at the music industry itself. No, when looking at necessary revenues (monetize?) for those that make (write) music. It would be stupid to throw a whole body of law away because an industry is taking away too much money from the ones that have the creativity. So music authors should start using the rigths given to them by copyright law. They then should use the regained power to facilitate their own (social) network to allow the ones in their network to download their music legally and for free. And that those who want to earn money from using music should pay a fee for the licence. All this can be done by using the internet as a distribution and fee earning system.

In this way the social networks around music(ians) can get stronger, the networks can then be used to monetize on the strength of the network aimed at those that want to earn money from music. A perfect business model and also addressing most of the issues of Leonhard: A nice bit of quotes, beautifully told but not a solution to the problem. The music author should still be enabled to earn money from his creativity. Go and check out www.villamusicrights.com where the autor enjoys the right to determine its own licences for those who earn from the(ir) music and where listeners (You and I) can legally download and for free

So I agree that music authors should stop signing contracts that after becoming famous don't seem so nice anymore. That sounds a bit hypocritical, start giving away licences for free to home users and start charging those who earn money from using the music, (web) radio stations and the like. The internet is the ideal machine to realize this. In that the music can really become everybodies possesion and in the mean reap revenues for the creators among us.

With regards to the comments above, I don't care what happened i the past or whatever lyrics people wrote. No one could've predicted this 20 years ago and referring to those lyrics is totally out of context.

I am married to a musician who I have financially supported for the past 3 years. Its a struggle. I see how many people download his album illegally, and here we are struggling to pay the rent each month and eating food from the reduced counter. Whoever thinks it's right that hours of hard labour should equal a free product needs to think again. Whatever measure the FAC and the government take to at least attempt to make this situation better, I fully support. We can only learn from mistakes to get this right and it can't get any worse than it already is.

Respect to all of these musicians and shame on the folks who comment without being fully informed on these issues.