I doubt it's very feasible to do a real, independent study on this. I tend to agree with you on this.
But it doesn'tstoppeoplefromtrying.
(The last two are PDFs)
I never said that it outweighed, or even matched the lost revenue, I said it might which means you can't say for sure that piracy has a negative impact.
I tend to believe that piracy doesn't have a negative impact though because of an interesting observation that I read somewhere. (but I can't for the life of me remember where, could have been a/. post)
There are 3 types of pirates:
People who would have bought the product, but didn't because they downloaded it.
People who wouldn't have bought the product, but downloaded it and liked it enough to buy/recommend it to their friends.
People who wouldn't have bought the product, but downloaded it and didn't like it enough to buy/recommend it to their friends.
As long as 2 and 3 are greater than 1, there is a net gain.
As to whether or not this is up to the community to decide, I'm not arguing the moral issues, I'm just arguing the economic ones. In economics, the consumer always decides the profit, even when that makes them criminals.
it DOES have a negative financial impact on the producers of that content. How do you know?
You have to factor in the fact that seeing a movie/listening to a song is advertisement for that work and for the creators of that work. I don't know if this is going to be enough to counter the loss from the people who download the work instead of buying it (not all "pirates" are in this category, but I digress), but it does need to be considered.
If you have evidence (a study, statistics) that there is a negative impact, I would be very interested to see it. (Any study done by the MPAA/RIAA/Affiliates doesn't count, they bend and break the facts way to often for me to trust any "research" they do in the matter.)
I understand that it seems like common sense to assume that downloading hurts the movie and music industries, mostly because they make such a stink over it. But assumptions like this only muddy the water.
I am not attacking you in any way, I just really hate it when things I consider to be propaganda are treated like facts without any evidence. =^)
Why does their bank account have to be the bottom line?
Why couldn't they maybe, just maybe, want this to be free, be willing to put this documentary out there so that anyone can see it for free, even at a (monetary) loss to them? What is wrong with contributing to the public good without focusing on what you are going to get in return?
I remember when rock was young
Me and Suzie had so much fun
holding hands and skimming stones
Had an old gold Chevy and a place of my own
But the biggest kick I ever got
was doing a thing called the Crocodile Rock
While the other kids were Rocking Round the Clock
we were hopping and bopping to the Crocodile Rock
Well Crocodile Rocking is something shocking
when your feet just can't keep still
I never knew me a better time and I guess I never will
Oh Lawdy mama those Friday nights
when Suzie wore her dresses tight
and the Crocodile Rocking was out of sight
But the years went by and the rock just died
Suzie went and left us for some foreign guy
Long nights crying by the record machine
dreaming of my Chevy and my old blue jeans
But they'll never kill the thrills we've got
burning up to the Crocodile Rock
Learning fast as the weeks went past
we really thought the Crocodile Rock would last
The only silly word in there is Crocodile. It's actually a rather touching song.
(Yes, I know he didn't write the lyrics. Still a good song.)
(BTW, I don't release Crock Rock into the PD, no matter what my sig says. For obvious reasons.)
the vast majority of the music on the internet is people copying bands they like and never getting better at what they do. The vast majority of anything on the internet is crap. That's why you have to look for the good stuff.
The great thing about the internet (ok, one of the great things) is that anyone can put anything they want to online and it is available to the world. This is the reason we have thousands of mySpace kiddies band wanna-bes just regurgitating crap they think is music. But, there are also gems like Jonathan Coulton or some of the higher ranking artists on Garage Band. You just have to look.
i have gotten bored with music because since the beginning of the decade, it has gotten boring. very few bands have vision. Might I suggest the links above?
Really, go out and look for artists. They are out there. You just won't hear them on (non-internet) radio.
The internet is saving the music, but killing off the music industry.
"Normal People do not look at porn on the internet!"
"Ooooooohhhhhh? You have no idea!
Ready Normal People?"
"Ready."
"Ready."
"Ready."
"Let me hear it!"
Yeah, I know, I know, "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"
But really, doesn't it make sense that the smarter you are, the more likely you are to recognize your your carnal cravings and decide not to act on them? I've been out of high school for two years, but as I recall, there were two types of teens when it came to sex:
Those who thought a first date was best spent in the back of a car going at it, and those who thought sex was a special thing to be shared after you have been dating for a long time (or even *gasp* after you are married).
Can you guess which group had more A students?
I'm not talking about just the geeks who couldn't get a date if their life depended on it, I'm talking about the smart kids who were also into sports, band (well, not so much band, but that's another story;^) ) or other "normal" stuff.
Then again, maybe I'm just over analyzing things and it really does boil down to "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"
Math:
GNU/Linux = !Unix/Linux
so, (hypothetically) if Linux = Unix, then GNU/Linux = !Unix/Unix
We can't let Unix be 0, because then there would be no Unix, and we can't have that.
So, let Unix = !0.
now, !Unix/Unix = !(!0)/!0
this simplifies to 0/!0
since 0 over any non-0 is 0
we get GNU/Linux = 0.
Now, GNU/Linux is not 0 for the same reason Unix isn't 0. (it's just to awesome to not exist)
So, therefore, Linux != Unix. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
Why does it have to be hard AI?
Wouldn't some sort of soft AI (expert-system, neural-net) do just as well?
I could be wrong, but doesn't "hard" AI refer to a system that is conscious?
Why would you have to be conscious to recognize movie clips?
Wow. So is JKR subtly poking at copyright laws, or is it a happy coincidence?
btw, I haven't read the book yet, and almost didn't read your post after I saw the words "Deathly Hallows". Do you know how hard it is to avoid spoilers on the internet? =/
A good ICBM needs to be compact, so that is easily hidden, and above all it must be storable in a ready-to-fire form. That meant using storable liquid fuels instead of condenses gases for first generation missiles, and solid fuels in the later designs.
Sir, please remain where you are. This network is being traced.
~NSA
'It's more copyleft, more liberal and less restrictive than our current license.' But, call within the next ten minutes, and you can get two, that's right, TWO, GPLv3 licenses for the same low-low price! Don't miss out on this special TV offer!
"While filtering and monitoring technologies help parents to screen out offensive content and to monitor their child's online activities, the use of these technologies is far from universal and may not be fool-proof in keeping kids away from adult material," Sen. Inouye said. Or, to rephrase that:
"There are ways for parents to keep their kids from the stuff we want to censor out, but we don't trust them to do it. Also, those darn kids are to sneaky for their parents to stop."
Whatever happened to letting the parents do their job and parent?
Didn't Disney violate someone's copyright with Mickey Mouse or something? Not exactly copyright violation, it was a clear parody of Steamboat Bill, Jr., a movie starring Buster Keaton. (which was based on a song, Steamboat Bill; the plot just keeps thickening and thickening) of course, Disney is known to throw a legal monkey-fit when anyone parodies their work.
"Whichever comes first" would be especially problematic as it would encourage public domain killing squads who go around and kill artists so their work becomes public domain.
Well, since the RIAA owns the copyright on so many works...
I say we get ourselves a ship, some cutlasses, some pistols, and a black flag, and show those scallywags some real piratin'! ARRRRRG!
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh, for the last time, Sir Elton John didn't say anything about file shareing. Now go RTFA.
But it doesn't stop people from trying.
(The last two are PDFs)
I never said that it outweighed, or even matched the lost revenue, I said it might which means you can't say for sure that piracy has a negative impact.
I tend to believe that piracy doesn't have a negative impact though because of an interesting observation that I read somewhere. (but I can't for the life of me remember where, could have been a
There are 3 types of pirates:
- People who would have bought the product, but didn't because they downloaded it.
- People who wouldn't have bought the product, but downloaded it and liked it enough to buy/recommend it to their friends.
- People who wouldn't have bought the product, but downloaded it and didn't like it enough to buy/recommend it to their friends.
As long as 2 and 3 are greater than 1, there is a net gain.As to whether or not this is up to the community to decide, I'm not arguing the moral issues, I'm just arguing the economic ones. In economics, the consumer always decides the profit, even when that makes them criminals.
You have to factor in the fact that seeing a movie/listening to a song is advertisement for that work and for the creators of that work. I don't know if this is going to be enough to counter the loss from the people who download the work instead of buying it (not all "pirates" are in this category, but I digress), but it does need to be considered.
If you have evidence (a study, statistics) that there is a negative impact, I would be very interested to see it. (Any study done by the MPAA/RIAA/Affiliates doesn't count, they bend and break the facts way to often for me to trust any "research" they do in the matter.)
I understand that it seems like common sense to assume that downloading hurts the movie and music industries, mostly because they make such a stink over it. But assumptions like this only muddy the water.
I am not attacking you in any way, I just really hate it when things I consider to be propaganda are treated like facts without any evidence. =^)
Why does their bank account have to be the bottom line?
Why couldn't they maybe, just maybe, want this to be free, be willing to put this documentary out there so that anyone can see it for free, even at a (monetary) loss to them? What is wrong with contributing to the public good without focusing on what you are going to get in return?
Capitalists. Yech.
~Gandalf, FOTR
Vista User?
/joke
Alternately:
Lyrics: xkcd
(Yes, I know he didn't write the lyrics. Still a good song.) (BTW, I don't release Crock Rock into the PD, no matter what my sig says. For obvious reasons.)
The great thing about the internet (ok, one of the great things) is that anyone can put anything they want to online and it is available to the world. This is the reason we have thousands of mySpace kiddies band wanna-bes just regurgitating crap they think is music. But, there are also gems like Jonathan Coulton or some of the higher ranking artists on Garage Band. You just have to look.
i have gotten bored with music because since the beginning of the decade, it has gotten boring. very few bands have vision. Might I suggest the links above?
Really, go out and look for artists. They are out there. You just won't hear them on (non-internet) radio.
The internet is saving the music, but killing off the music industry.
Go internet.
The sound of the sarcasm whizzing by over your head.
"Normal People do not look at porn on the internet!"
"Ooooooohhhhhh? You have no idea!
Ready Normal People?"
"Ready."
"Ready."
"Ready."
"Let me hear it!"
Yeah, I know, I know, "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"
;^) ) or other "normal" stuff.
But really, doesn't it make sense that the smarter you are, the more likely you are to recognize your your carnal cravings and decide not to act on them? I've been out of high school for two years, but as I recall, there were two types of teens when it came to sex:
Those who thought a first date was best spent in the back of a car going at it, and those who thought sex was a special thing to be shared after you have been dating for a long time (or even *gasp* after you are married).
Can you guess which group had more A students?
I'm not talking about just the geeks who couldn't get a date if their life depended on it, I'm talking about the smart kids who were also into sports, band (well, not so much band, but that's another story
Then again, maybe I'm just over analyzing things and it really does boil down to "Geeks don't get any! LOLZ!!one1eleven!11"
Which explains why Linux will never be Unix.
Math:
GNU/Linux = !Unix/Linux
so, (hypothetically) if Linux = Unix, then GNU/Linux = !Unix/Unix
We can't let Unix be 0, because then there would be no Unix, and we can't have that.
So, let Unix = !0.
now, !Unix/Unix = !(!0)/!0
this simplifies to 0/!0
since 0 over any non-0 is 0
we get GNU/Linux = 0. Now, GNU/Linux is not 0 for the same reason Unix isn't 0. (it's just to awesome to not exist) So, therefore, Linux != Unix. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.
that is not "decent".
"acceptable substitute when nothing better is available" is stretching it a bit in fact.
Why does it have to be hard AI?
Wouldn't some sort of soft AI (expert-system, neural-net) do just as well?
I could be wrong, but doesn't "hard" AI refer to a system that is conscious?
Why would you have to be conscious to recognize movie clips?
Wow. So is JKR subtly poking at copyright laws, or is it a happy coincidence?
btw, I haven't read the book yet, and almost didn't read your post after I saw the words "Deathly Hallows". Do you know how hard it is to avoid spoilers on the internet? =/
Hey! You! I saw that!
Give me back my shrine!
Psychosomatism, FTW!
"There are ways for parents to keep their kids from the stuff we want to censor out, but we don't trust them to do it. Also, those darn kids are to sneaky for their parents to stop."
Whatever happened to letting the parents do their job and parent?
This link is applicable and interesting.
Well, since the RIAA owns the copyright on so many works...
I say we get ourselves a ship, some cutlasses, some pistols, and a black flag, and show those scallywags some real piratin'! ARRRRRG!
...that I could get the TiVo card and use it on my Ubuntu laptop?
(I hate you broadcom.)