Slashdot Mirror
2002 MP3 Winners and Losers
An anonymous reader writes "MP3newswire.net is running their annual losers and winners list in digital media. Each has 8 finalists with the big winner KaZaa for becoming profitable and doubling Napster's peak traffic despite setbacks like getting briefly booted from Download.com. The big loser? No surprise, it's the RIAA who despite several wins in court have failed in their quest to stem file trading. Lawrence Lessig and Dmitry Skylarov also made the winners list, though as the article points out it wasn't exactly a great year for Dmitry."
I seem to remember hearing something that might reverse the positions of Kazaa and the RIAA. :)
++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
I'm sure thompson media was a winner as they collect royalties on ANY product/commercial software that uses the mp3 format.
That's why patents are good, you actually make money from your ideas/discoveries.
Stanley Feinbaum, professional journalist and master debater! God bless the USA!
With that kind of economics, no wonder no one can beat Microsoft.
Except that maybe Microsoft is using its OS & browser monopoly to gain market share by undercutting the MPEG-4 price?
A story was on this a few days ago
Offtopic: Just how bad will it look on RIAA's system administratiors resimay to have worked there?
they could be the big winners. as the conglomerate that owns the content that are converted to mp3s, if they just offered a comparably convenient, legitimate solution to p2p filesharing, they would make money and save money (instead of paying all those lawyers).
smd4985
Kazaa, it seems to me, is a fundamentally flawed approach to file sharing. Sure, it's a strong program, well implemented, well maintained - but it seems to violate the very principle which makes file sharing symptomatic of a wider, very important issue in the music/film industry - openness. They have yet, for example, to port their software to Linux or Mac OS X. They don't release their source code. They are profitting on something which qualifies, very obviously, as stealing. How are we to make the principle of file and information sharing and open models legimitate if the main proponent of anti-corporate file sharing is a corporate, profitable entity in and of itself? The only way to make file sharing a legitimate cause is to make it an open cause - to force the middle men out of contention by making a legimate counter-movement and unfurl the banners of open source, open information, open everything. I don't support KazAa for this reason. It's a very efficient(and for them, very profitable) way to steal. The music industry needs incentive to reform, to make something as easy as KazAa available to its demographic. It has yet to do this, and I don't see how KazAa is helping.
I was surprised that emusic.com didn't make their list. As one of the largest online providers of legal, non-DRM MP3s on the net they should have at least garnered an honorable mention. With practically unlimited downloads for $10 or $15 a month, I'd say consumers are the big winners here. I've been using the service for the past month and my music collection, especially jazz, has grown larger than it ever could have at $15 a CD.
"you can't steal without takeing something away from someone"
Actually, it's even less simple than that.
In English Law at least, in order to be convicted of theft, it has to be demonstrated that a person intended to permanently deprive a person of his lawfully owned goods.
It would seem that a credible, "I was only borrowing it," defence is reasonable grounds for no action being taken [criminally at least.]
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
First of all, p2p is used for more then piracy. Its not the "sole intent" as many people like to pretend.
Yes pirating occurs.. but so does drug running on our roads.. does that make it the 'sole intent'. No of course not.
Plus you are also not considering that waht you consider piracy only applies to YOUR country. many do not reconize copyrights, so its NOT, I repeat, NOT piracy there...
Try to spread the truth, not biased lies desgined to skew public opinion.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Yes. Kazaa is a HUGE portion of the P2P traffic these days. Really. The fact that Kazaa doesn't work in Linux doesn't mean shit. 90% of the people sharing music files are doing it in Windows.
Well, that, and it's a stupid name...
Having recently picked up an iPod, I think it's great. However, I do have a few qualms with it. The wonderful device can only be "linked" to one computer at a time, and if you ever accidentally hit "Yes" when you've plugged it into the wrong computer you lose all your songs and have to set them all back up again on your main iPod computer. I have several computers on my home network, and they all have MP3s on them. I wanted to be able to use my iPod to transfer files between each of them, but you cannot take files off the iPod. The Firewire connection is blazingly fast, and I love that, but in my mind its inability to transfer files between computers is a crippling issue. If it had this capability, it would be number one on the RIAA's hitlist, which could become one of its biggest selling points. After all, the MP3 Winners' List said it itself: in this post-Napster world, the number one indicator of the quality of a product is the fervor with which the RIAA wants to kill it.
And by the way, connecting the iPod to that little FM transmitter they sell at the Apple Store is incredible. You sit down in your car and all the music you want is playing on the radio, without commercials. It's like satellite radio but you choose ALL the music, not just the station. I love my iPod, and I think it should have been placed higher than Kazaa on the list. It is better for the music lover than Kazaa, because Kazaa can pretty much only be used for stealing shoddy versions of the music. The iPod can be used with MP3s ripped from CD, so you can control the quality of your music. I hate downloaded music, because so much of it sucks (qualitywise).
Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
I'm not sure how to take a list of 'winners' that has KaZaa listed in the number one spot except to say that the 'winners' of 2002 my be the big losers of 2003.
The entertainment industry has won the right to sue KaZaa in the US. This will most assuredly ensue during the next few years. I'm not sure that under the law KaZaa is guilty of anything. What I am sure of is that the entertainment industry is far more finically capable of engaging in litigation than KaZaa is in defending against that litigation.
Napster made the mistake of providing a list of shared files to their users. The implication of this is that Napster should have known that most files shared where copyrighted and were being shared without the copyright owners permission. Further, the fact that Napster provided information as to where the user could find specific copyrighted materials meant that Napster was actively aiding in copyright infringements.
P2P programs like LimeWire that sprang up after Napster's legal problems began didn't inform the user where to find specific files. They only provide some of the IP addresses to computers on the network. It is the individual clients that must provide content lists. In this way LimeWire and other P2P software providers can distance themselves from copyright infringements. P2P networks have legitimate uses just as a hunting rifle has a legitimate use. It is no more the P2P software companies responsibility to ensure that user don't break the law than it is for the manufactures of hunting rifles to ensure that none of their products are used in murders or other crimes. At least that will be one defense that will probably be put to the courts.
However, I believe that the entertainment industry will crush these companies by driving them into bankruptcy through litigation. It's not right but it's just one more symptom of our societies being taken over by the Corporations.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Well I have an account here, I have about 500 posts, so I can call myself an "active user".
:)
The way you are talking is like if EVERYONE here that has an account is a pirate, that EVERYONE here that is an active member fits the profile you are mentionning.
Do you know what's the % of browsers that are connecting here that are Internet Explorer? Last time I saw the numbers, it was more than 40%, so I wouldn't call this a "linux-only fanatic website", in fact, I don't really care about the open-source versus proprietary software debate, Both exists, both have shown great advantages and great flaws. I couldn't care less about the MP3/RIAA debate, but see? there are other subjects here that are of interests, and I am sure that the "40%" figure using IE couldn't care less about the few who yells louder about sticking it to the man, like you say.
What I find irritating is when someone comes in , post something generalizing a userbase and think he knows everything, and the others modding him up are as hypocrite as he is. If you don't like it, you have the right, just go away, don't read it and get frustrated because of what you see, heck, consult someone if it stops you for sleeping!.
Here's a cluebat to knock yourself with: There are 1000s of users here, if one day the "kill them all" side post more comments on a specific article, it doesn't mean that the "Who cares" side is smaller or approves what is written under that specific article. Without getting into extensive statistical/probability issues, if one day 1 or 10 people are saying how bad the MPAA is, maybe it's not those same 1 or 10 people that are posting that article about how good spiderman was and they should buy the dvd.
Oh yeah, Taco does... well this guy runs the damn site, if I had a website that would have a lot of hits like his and that I had a minimal powertrip, I'd love to speak out loud like he's doing, almost anyone would. And besides, who tell's you its always his sincere opinion? maybe being provocative makes people post even more and generates discussions, that's what this site is about no? getting a clue now? good. Hope I helped.
--- Original message ---
These are all bleatings of the party lines. Here, we consider proprietary software Evil until Rob Malda tells us otherwise, or it gets ported to Linux. Then it becomes a special class of proprietary software which somehow becomes better than the rest. KaZaA is one example. WordPerfect is another. Somehow, they are able to ignore this seemingly large discrepency by claiming that these companies are "helping" the "community". The only one being helped is VA Research^W Linux^W Software who gets to sell ads to these people after giving them free publicity on the most popular "Linux" site of them all.
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
I work in IT. Whenever I talk to other people who work in IT (and for that matter people who don't), most of the time I hear that the music distributors (e.g. RIAA) have outlived their usefulness. Once Hilary Rosen remarked that the IT industry was swallowing their industry.
It is. We are.
When you can electronically transfer music and burn it to recordable, red book-compatible media, when you can print cover art on an inkjet or color laser printer, there is absolutely no need for music distribution companies. No need whatsoever. And, more importantly, no need to pay US$21.99 for a music CD anymore.
The problem that the RIAA has is that people aren't nearly as stupid as they think. Uninformed perhaps, but not stupid. When people are clued in I always see the same response: we should either be able to download music for a small fee, or call our local music store, tell them what we want burned and printed, and head over to pick up our custom CD for all of 5 bucks.
So yes, the IT industry is going to swallow the record distribution industry, just as the automotive industry swallowed up the need for horses and buggies (and buggy whips).
I am sorry, I have no sympathy for the labels, or even the artists really (sorry) when it comes to losing their CD profits.
Let's not forget, not so very long ago, there really wasn't a way to record music. So, music, like every other form of "service" us humans provide, was a 1:1 ratio. If a show charged a fee to see, you paid it. If you wanted to see it again, you paid again. Much like 2 donkeys for 2 dollars, 4 donkeys for 4. Music was an artform, experienced first hand.
Then one day, technology advanced and shook things up. For a brief period a loophole was opened for a very small segment of individuals. It was discovered that an "artist" could "perform" only once, yet make virtually limitless, 100% accurate copies of their performance and sell them to everyone on the planet for pennies of production costs. Amazing! Sure, doctors, architects, automobile makers, any just about anyone else on the face of the earth that builds something or does something for money will never be able to (barring huge advancements in quantum replicators) do this. But who cares! Musicians could!
[this part is my opinion, disregard if you disagree] Music turned ugly. It went from meaningful art created one off, by the artists themselves, straight to celebrity fame, gaudy fortune, ass and tit shaking, commercial trash. Are there exceptions to this rule? For the love of God, YES! But, come on... Britney Spears?
Anyway. For a few decades music became a massively profitable industry. Handed to the labels by techological advancements. But now. The very same technology that gave musicians and their "masters" an unfair advantage has advanced once again and taken that cash cow away.
And I can't help but say... boo... fucking... hoo.
Welcome back to the rest of the world, where hard working people turn one kind of material into another, or provide a service for money, and are limited by the constraints of how much time is in a day, and how much the original materials cost. It may have been fun while it lasted, but I am not going to cry that you're losing it.
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!
I don't understand why they added Xolox. Nobody uses Xolox anymore. It's infested with spyware and it's GUI sucks. It is also very behind in Gnutella technologies (I think it only recently added Ultrapeers, yikes). I don't think MP3Newswire is too informed in P2P because they should of at least listed Shareaza which has been hailed as the leader of the "new Gnutella" (Shareaza's Gnutella2, noteably). Frankly, Shareaza is currently the most advanced and best looking P2P client out there.
Oh well, maybe next year.