Slashdot Mirror
Decoy Files on P2P Sites Become Ad Vehicles
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Some record labels hire outside companies to plant fake files on peer-to-peer sites. Now, labels are turning these decoy files into vehicles for marketing to music pirates by inserting promotional material into the files, such as an eight-minute clip from a Jay-Z concert, the Wall Street Journal reports." From the article: "'The concept here is making the peer-to-peer networks work for us,' says Jay-Z's attorney, Michael Guido. 'While peer-to-peer users are stealing the intellectual property, they are also the active music audience,' and 'this technology allows us to market back to them.'"
but the RIAA is going to claim they buy more music because of the ads they're decoying out now.
"Michael Guido --'While peer-to-peer users are stealing the intellectual property, they are also the active music audience"
Wrong-o, Guido the Killer Pimp. Nothing has ever been stolen via p2p. The words you are looking for is "users are violating the copyright of...".
Where were you when the voynix came?
If they claim this audience can be monetized, how can they consider it to be non-legit?
I would have second thoughts about hiring any lawyer that can't distinguish between two entirely different sets of laws. I'd half expect Mr. Guido to charge jaywalkers with attempted murder based on his statements here.
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
Yes, it's a trap.
But on a serious note, this will not work, because when someone goes on their favorite P2P, looking for a full lenght Jay-Z concert, the search results will have some options. Here we have a file that is 8min long, and another that is 1 hour long (or if there is no "length" category, they will see one is 10mb and one is 700mb) and come to the realization that "hmmm...I was searching for a full lenght concert. Most concerts are more than 8 minutes long, better go with the 1 hour file." This inevitably increases the number of sources available for the pirated file. This increases the number of people who download that particular file, cuase I always sort by number of sources to get the best download speed (and hopefully a more credible file). Those who inadvertantly get the advertisement will say "WTF? this isn't what I wanted" and delete the file from their computers, go back to their P2P app. and find a better one. They have to remember, not everyone is a moron. Now if they want to put the whole concert on the p2p site, but include maybe some advertisements in it like "Pick up Jay-Z's latest album "" now at Tower Records" and then saying that it is a free download, I think you might have something there. But if you give people a teaser when they think they are already breaking the law, but don't care, they are just going to either a) ignore it and download the pirated version, or b) watch it and say, that was great, but I'd really like to see how it ends, better find the full length version"
"It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
Pay. Absolutely, I prefer a pay model. Advertising supported media is an ever declining standard. It starts with a little advertising. It increases until people start turning off. Which means they clutch at more advertising to keep the revenues up. The only thing that keeps standards high ultimately, is a customer base that is willing to pay for the content.
Besides, an advertising supported model is incompatible with owning your music, film, whatever. Afterall, no one will make money by selling you a song that eternally has the same ad for Nike's latest running shoes at the beginning of it year after year. The advertising model only works in a setup where you are fed your media content. And of course there are economic pressures against offering you too much choice. We're going to have to fight hard enough against licensing model media purchases (i.e. You've paid for six months of this song) now that the technology for it is available. Part of that fight will be rejecting models like advertising funded media which tie into it.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Actually, "those imbeciles" didn't build the $35 Billion industry, their predecessors did. For all intents and purposes, they inherited it. I'd wager that very few of the people who were around during the rise of the large commercial record business are still there. No, I think most of them -- if they have any brains -- have cashed in their stock options and are laughing into their martinis, headed for Bali.
The imbeciles currently in charge of Sony/Warner/BMG were busily driving one of the biggest corporate empires ever created into the ground; it's only quite recently that they seem to have caught up to what a lot of people have been saying all along: there's a whole lot of money to be made in digital content if you play along and don't fight it every step of the way.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
"So, then... you don't mind if I -NOT STEAL- your SSN, driver's license info, ATM card # and PIN?"
Ah, the old fallacy used by those who have no idea what "theft" means. You are implying that if it is not theft, then it is OK. Are you not aware that the law books and moral codes are full of many different crimes that are not theft, but are still imagine that!!! wrong? The meanings of words change, but the meaning of "theft" has not.
"and a record is no longer a big, black, plastic disk"
Where did you get that idea? Only records are called records. No one calls a tape, CD, or mp3 file a "record" that I have ever heard at all.
Where were you when the voynix came?
I always thought a perfect use of the p2p networks was to place low-bitrate files (128kb/s mp3's) with bumpers around announcing the artist. They could talk over them like a DJ. The point is that they get the songs out there as an advertisement to either buy the CD or download a CD quality file. They could do like they used to do and have an album version and a radio version (shorter), except that it would be a p2p version.
Get it on social networks, p2p networks, it would be the same as listening to the radio. It would build artist loyalty, it would get the record companies out of the payola business, it would let them more easily turn a profit on marginal acts because you can narrowcast this stuff. If I can think that stuff up, imagine what somebody who really had a stake in it could do.
But I'm convinced they're so worried about next quarter's profits that they can't build for the future. Oh well. Maybe someboy will be adventurous enough to try it.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you