Slashdot Mirror

Argg. Stupid copy paste didn't work. Sorry for the bad link. Didn't mean to redirect people to a persona 4 faq.
Now slashdot knows I suck at RPGs and read guides.
here is billboard link

http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/industry/digital-and-mobile/what-really-happened-to-sony-and-universal-1008059892.story

Hows the game? Haven't played it yet.

Argg. Stupid copy paste didn't work. Sorry for the bad link. Didn't mean to redirect people to a persona 4 faq. Now slashdot knows I suck at RPGs and read guides. here is billboard link
http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/industry/digital-and-mobile/what-really-happened-to-sony-and-universal-1008059892.story

Do you have any idea how much money makes on selling content and software? About 6 Billion in revenue in 2011 out of a total of 35 Billion, up from 4.2Billion in 2010. ( http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/industry/digital-and-mobile/business-matters-itunes-global-revenue-was-1005988552.story ). That's almost 20% of total revenue.

Or rather it would be 20% if the $35B weren't quarterly revenue. Annual was $108 billion. So by revenue it's more like 6%. 70% of that goes straight to the creators and rights owners.

Do you have any idea how much money makes on selling content and software? About 6 Billion in revenue in 2011 out of a total of 35 Billion, up from 4.2Billion in 2010. ( http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/industry/digital-and-mobile/business-matters-itunes-global-revenue-was-1005988552.story ). That's almost 20% of total revenue. I am fairly certain Steve's anouncement of the iTunes store was something that could be summarized to "we are going to revolutionize the way you purchase content" and not "we thought we'd offer you a service to put songs and apps on your apple devices, since the media creators and app creators are such nice people and we want to help them out." Apple has a very healthy profit margin on their app store and even if they only rake in 10% of their revenue as profit, it's still 600 Million for 2011. The hook to sell was the combination of hardware, software and content. If you control the entire chain, you get to tell the shots and your competitors will have to scramble to pick up the crumbs that you leave them.

expect a lot from them ? Really ? think about it, if you make small adjustments and selll the same music (or seems different but it's not) and you still make a fortune and it's working why change anything ? This might sound very negative or insulting but it's because people buy the same music that the music industry keep selling the same music after all. Why change the recipe when that same recipe is making millions in profit...you gotta be an idiot to change that. Just wait till the people stop buying the same music and problaby things will change but given the last stats. The recipe is really simple and the music industry got it figured out. Change the artist and some notes here and there and voila, you got yourself a superstar for a year or 2...maybe more it he/she shows some talent.

a completely free(from a libertarian perspective) and uncensored internet connection from a plethora of ISP in the United States and the United Kingdom. [...]

Oh, really? Please define "libertarian".

"THE NEW ENEMY"

I have put together a top 10 list of the positions taken by these groups that I will define as their extremist, radical anti-copyright agenda.

No. 10: They support changing the law to reduce damages for copyright infringement.

No. 9: They support the elimination of statutory damages for secondary copyright infringement.

No. 8: They favor rolling back copyright extension; in some cases, radically.

No. 7: They favor the elimination of the songwriter and publisher rights for server, cache and buffer copies.

No. 6: They oppose efforts to obtain the identities of individuals engaged in massive copyright infringement.

No. 5: They support extreme versions of orphan works legislation.

No. 4: They have filed legal briefs supporting anti-copyright positions of Grokster, Napster, LimeWire, Cablevision, Google, YouTube and Verizon.

No. 3: They oppose graduated-response protection for copyright owners.

No. 2: They oppose treaties that support copyright enforcement like the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

No. 1: They actually argue that illegal peer-to-peer file-sharing traffic helps the economy and doesn't hurt songwriters.

p2p isn't bootlegging because the sharer makes no profit.
That aside, the big companies that want to outlaw it are NOT doing it to prevent their own stuff from being shared.
They're doing it to keep their COMPETITION's stuff from being shared.
They know full well that p2p is very effective free global advertising and it's a level playing field where popularity is based on the MERITS of the product rather than on the size of the label's marketing budget.

Remember, this all started when a dj in Hawaii found an unknown guy named Shaggy on Napster and he went to #2 on the billboard charts.
The RIAA didn't try to have sharing of THEIR STUFF outlawed,
They tried to have SHARING ITSELF outlawed.

I personally could not count the great bands I've discovered through p2p and I've promoted all of them through word of mouth and sharing.
Through myself and others like me, previously struggling unknown artists have gained immensely greater sales of both their products and their show tickets.

THIS is what the disingenuous, monopolistic "artist associations" (and those they fool) really hate.
Their victimhood is a farce.

"THE NEW ENEMY"

I have put together a top 10 list of the positions taken by these groups that I will define as their extremist, radical anti-copyright agenda.

No. 10: They support changing the law to reduce damages for copyright infringement.

No. 9: They support the elimination of statutory damages for secondary copyright infringement.

No. 8: They favor rolling back copyright extension; in some cases, radically.

No. 7: They favor the elimination of the songwriter and publisher rights for server, cache and buffer copies.

No. 6: They oppose efforts to obtain the identities of individuals engaged in massive copyright infringement.

No. 5: They support extreme versions of orphan works legislation.

No. 4: They have filed legal briefs supporting anti-copyright positions of Grokster, Napster, LimeWire, Cablevision, Google, YouTube and Verizon.

No. 3: They oppose graduated-response protection for copyright owners.

No. 2: They oppose treaties that support copyright enforcement like the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

No. 1: They actually argue that illegal peer-to-peer file-sharing traffic helps the economy and doesn't hurt songwriters.

OK, here's a bit of detail on the artists complaining, from TFA -

http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i27945265e8c954255246318766e97f46

But - you're not getting it.

This isn't a take-down notice. This is way past that.

This is intended criminal prosecution against the execs of YouTube and Google in Germany, as TFS and TFA state.

Big difference.

Just read about it in the newspaper. (Daily Yomiuri, for me.)

Unfortunately, the on-line version leaves off a few things.

For instance, Kaneko's lawyer's pointed out that auto manufacturers would not "be punished if speeding became rampant." (Reported in the print news.)

Also, the on-line version doesn't mention that, "A revised Copyright Law that prohibits users from downloading such peer-to-peer file sharing software will come into force in January." (The last line of the print article.)

I think the print version of the Yomiuri may have been slightly off on that point... the sources I have seem to say the law is dealing with copyrighted works, not programs that can be used to download them. Copyright act amended

Japan Strengthens Copyright Law Basically, the new legal ground seems to be that downloading works protected by copyright without permission is now officially a crime, but they have to prove the defendent knew the file was not distributed legally. Up until now, prosecution has been mostly (if not completely?) uploaders. Nothing is being said about downloading the software itself.

If you want it from the original source, and you can read Japanese, this link has the text of the bill itself in PDF format. I have not translated it so I can't verify whether the English news sources are correct in their interpretation or not.

I swear the link was in the preview. Billboard interview

i'm not assuming anything. i'm suggesting that it would be a good move on the part of both companies. that doesn't mean that i think either of them will go for it. in fact, it's very unlikely that such a deal would occur. and you seem to immediately contradict yourself right after your first sentence. first you imply that Sony would not accept a partnership with Amazon's ebook distribution system without offering any kind reason for thinking so. then you go on to state that the Sony reader has a nice design, but lacks content, whereas the Kindle looks homely but has "a MASSIVE selection of content and a terrific distribution system." well isn't that exactly what Sony needs/is missing? if a lack of content and distribution system is what's preventing the Sony Reader from succeeding, then why would they not partner up with Amazon? it seems like that would be the only logical thing for them to do.

the fact that the current Kindle doesn't use WiFi doesn't play any part in this deal. Sony Reader/PSP/Zune/iPhone users can just access the Kindle Store website. it's not like EVDO is required to purchase ebooks from the Kindle Store.

and while Apple is currently making most of its money from selling iPods, the iTunes store is quickly dominating the music retail industry. in 2007 they became the 3rd largest music retailer in the U.S. with 10% market share. in 2008 it accounted for 70% of worldwide digital music sales. and despite the RIAA's claims to the otherwise, iTunes has revitalized the music industry and driven net profits up. our indie record label now receives over 75% of our music sales from iTunes alone.

so while iPod sales generated $3.36 billion in revenue for Apple in 2007, the iTunes Store brought in $1.9 billion of Apple's $2.7 billion in total music-related revenue in 2007. and iPod sales appear to be tapering off while iTunes is experiencing continued growth. so it's not inconceivable that iTunes will become an even bigger revenue stream for Apple in the future.

but i agree with you that the PSP/iPhone are not the ideal ebook reader for everyone. my Dad, for instance, simply can't read text printed on the PSP. so he can't really use his PSP as a web browser or an e-book reader. but that doesn't stop millions of young people from using their PSPs and cellphones to read books (if they can read web pages, then why not e-books?). the Japanese have even created an entire literary genre of serial literature that's distributed and consumed entirely by cellphones.

for older users with poorer eyesight or who have to read long, dense technical materials, a dedicated ebook reader like the Kindle is definitely a must. but that's still a niche market. and for the majority of young people whom the PSP & iPhone are aimed at, being able to read e-books on their portable devices would be a huge value add--it's actually my favorite use for the PSP.

Consider CDs. Do you honestly think the RIAA would charge less if people couldn't buy used copies?

The RIAA is already making it difficult if not illegal to sell used CDs.

With Sony BMG deal, Amazon will offer unlocked MP3s from all major labels. RIAA days are numbered...

The source indicates that the Zune is #1 on Amazon; granted, Amazon is a major retailer, but that does not indicate total sales. Perhaps this is part of a clever strategy by Amazon and Microsoft to take on Apple - see http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i6efb69eb2243cb842be35f0eab40082d for an article regarding Amazon and Pepsi giving away free music. Putting forth the appearance that Apple is slipping is clever marketing indeed. Manipulating the data? Who knows!

Actually, they do care if you sell used CD's. . . http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/ind ustry/e3i9ebf2d8ce6fd1e267bac18d43959ac24

How the hell these imbeciles built a $35 billion dollar industry without retaining you people as consultants is beyond me.

with bribery and underhanded business practices?

There's an interview in Billboard with Microsoft's new GM of marketing on this Quote:
...music industry executives have expressed frustration at [Apple's] my-way-or-the-highway tactics. Competition means more opportunities to sell digital music in ways Apple won't allow. For instance, Microsoft is more open to variable pricing, whereas Apple is not.
Variable Prices? Hmm...wonder if that would mean higher or lower cost! Would someone please tell the labels that their market have changed and they need to be happy to be around at all? Higer prices might just get some of us back to the popular, fixed price, market contenders known as P2P. Support independent artists!!