Slashdot Mirror
Jobs Resists Music Industry Pressure
Drew writes "Steve Jobs is opposed to raising the price of online music sales, calling the music industry greedy, and
implying that price increases will bring about more piracy." From the article: "It may not seem like it, but it has been more than two years since the launch of the iTunes Music Store, and that alone has the music industry brimming with hopes for price-adjustments. They also don't buy Jobs' argument that a price increase will result in more piracy, but probably not for the reasons we might assume. I've long been of the conviction that piracy is not nearly as large of a problem as the RIAA makes it out to be." Also covered at Macworld.
Let's countdown until the day Apple gets legislated out of existence...
Any one how thinks that "Weird Al" Yankovic is "pretty good" has NO right to judge ANY music. None. Nada. Zip.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
You can just get the song you want rather than the whole album. It's rare today to actually like all the songs on an album.
Good point - this is true.
Proprietary/Non-Portable format? What, you plan on running it on what? iTunes plays on Windows and Mac. What more do you want? Linux? There are plenty of ways to get a purchased song to work on Linux. Oh, and you do get album artwork.
You have no idea what proprietary means do you?
And nope, its not portable either. If you want to play it on linux, you have to convert it to the non-propiertary mp4.
Oh, and album artwork included with itunes is vastly inferior to what you get in a physical CD (which itself was vastly inferior to what you got with a typical LP)
Go back to drinking whatever flavor of Kool-Aid you have been drinking (me thinks it's Linux/Microsoft blend).
Blah blah blah, go back to accepting the DRM walls slowly arising around you, blinded by the Shiny Apple Goodness (tm).
My pics.
You're not the corporate exec who wrote those letters to the girl scouts, boy scouts and camfire organizations telling them that they could legally sing songs like America The Beautiful and Happy Birthday at the campfire if each local council would just send $600 to the corporations holding the copyrights, are you?
If your logic were followed the Funk Brothers (to whom ASCAP paid NOTHING) wouldn't have been able to even go to the Detroit jazz clubs evenings and play together without being guilty of failing to pay ASCAP for the right to play the music that they themselves had created. Honestly, reality is not that neat, tidy box of chocolates that you would have us believe it is.
Your logic fascinates me... and probably eludes understanding. Let me elaborate...
What is your definition of a "normal" house, or, said differently, what properties qualify a house as "normal?" Is it the purchase price? Must it fall somewhere within the "average" price range for a home within a specific geographic area?
By implying that [what you perceive as] lavish homes make the owner greedy, can't that same standard be used on *any* homeowner? If you (or your parents) own a home, aren't you/they guilty of being greedy for purchasing it as oppsed to a less expensive home in a poorer neighborhood? How dare you/they use money to raise your standard of living!
Should people with wealth be restricted as to what they can spend it on? Just as the average homeowner attempts to get the best value for their money, shouldn't wealthy people be entitle to same? Since when do you dictate how others should spend their money? In short... what you preceive as "lavish" is actually "expected" and "normal" for someone of that wealth class. How Jobs chooses to spend his money, or what lifestyle he chooses to lead, is irrelevant and immaterial to how others (including Gates and Ellison) should lead their lives.
In short, I think your comment is intellectually bankrupt and not thought out at all.
Calling someone a pirate is worse than the "n-word". The "n-word" is a racial slur, but calling people "pirates" who share information freely is outright slander and deffimation. The "n-word" is rude and hurts peoples feelings, but "piracy" is an outright criminal accusation. And since when did copyrights help artists? And since when did copying their songs freely hurt them?
You're right, I shouldn't have compaired piracy to the "n-word", calling people pirates is far worse!