The people vote for their congress just like they vote for their state legislatures. People may feel like congress ignores them, but if the people keep voting the same congressmen into office the people keep getting what they want.
You compare Far Side to a one liner and C&H to a poem based upon the 1 frame vs. 3 frames (And I assume continuity). It is worth noting that telling a story in 1 frame or line versus 3 frames or a whole poem is much more difficult.
No, I didn't bother to read what you linked to. I don't care enough to do so.
Despite the fact that I'm not willing to spend the time/effort to prove that their are people out there that would purchase something that choose not to when it is available for free, anyone should be able to look at their own life an realize that it happens.
Either way, the Record Companies own the rights to the songs. So it really doesn't matter if it is beneficial to them to offer songs for free or not. They choose not to, and that is their right.
Someone, or several people, may have been willing to pay for the songs. However, going back to marketing 101, they are not going to pay for them if they are made available for free from this lady. So, by putting these songs out there to be downloaded for free, she lowered the retail value of the songs and cost the Record Company money and potential sales.
Also, in your marketing 101: A product is only worth what someone is willing to sell it for.
If someone owns something and someone else wants to buy it, they have to come to an agreement on the price. The price must fall within what the buyer wants to pay and what the seller is willing to sell for. Otherwise their is no sale and the seller keeps the goods and the buyer goes without.
Supply & Demand; Not just demand, and not just supply.
This is the major factor that impedes me too. I could ride a bike to work, and would enjoy it. However, I do not want to build a sweat and than have to work for 8 hours.
In what area has Obama increased freedom in the USA?
If I recall correctly, he changed the status quo of the "war on drugs" in that, the Federal Government will no longer prosecute if the State does not. A.k.a. they will no longer target Medical Marijuana in places like California.
A good thing that sometimes people feel their own destruction is worth the destruction of their enemy! I mean, imagine a world where someone killed himself to kill his enemy; that world would be pure lunacy.
Then WB is betting that they will make more in DVD sales to the public than they lose in sales to Netflix. If it turns out to be false, they can always switch back.
Redbox used to be able to pre-order (Like other rental companies and retail stores) so that they could have the machines stocked and ready to go on the release day. Now they've lost that privilage and have in turn resorted to purchasing copies from walmart, etc.
If we hold true that Netflix will continue to purchase the same number of DVDs, jsut 28 das later (As the GP said), than if someone who was going to "be good customers and rent the movie" from Netflix chooses to download and watch it, WB has not lost any sales or profit.
It is only going ot be a loss for WB if Netflix chooses to purchase less DVDs. And even then, it's only a loss of the number of DVD sales does not go up enough to cover the decline in Netflix purchases.
Somewhere along the line (Around the time VHS switched to DVD), they removed the pricey advanced copy and started selling the $15-$25 copy to the public and rental companies on the same day. (Rental companies can order in advance so they have them available to rent on day 1).
The way Obfuscant ended his comment was a bit of "flamebait", but his (or her) point is still valid. Someone's waited X number of weeks to see a movie already for various reasons (money being a main one), what's another 28 days going to be?
If you weren't looking to buy it and are an avid Netflix user, you probably only pay attention to when Netflix tells you the movie you've saved is available and not DVD release dates (Or at least that's what I do).
Glad you put the "Not quite as" in there. Because every company I've owrked for it's the "who you know" that get promoted before the "what you know". And usually the "what you know" get stuck in a position because they do it well and the company would suffer if they moved up, but the "know nothing" can move up the chain without them being missed in their current position.
If your running around building up a sweat, then yes, you would need a new shirt everyday. However, (assuming you wear an undershirt), your polo is not dirty (nor smelling) after a single use.
But, if you personally have an issue with body odor and need a new shirt everyday to keep from smelling, than go ahead and get 4 shirts:-)
Slashdot Mirror
The people vote for their congress just like they vote for their state legislatures. People may feel like congress ignores them, but if the people keep voting the same congressmen into office the people keep getting what they want.
You compare Far Side to a one liner and C&H to a poem based upon the 1 frame vs. 3 frames (And I assume continuity). It is worth noting that telling a story in 1 frame or line versus 3 frames or a whole poem is much more difficult.
Go ahead and opt out.
I really don't see the problem. If a Copyright holder doesn't want to be involved, they can opt out.
As long s the "a reasonable amount" is set by the Copyright Holder. They own the rights, and should be free to set the price.
No, I didn't bother to read what you linked to. I don't care enough to do so.
Despite the fact that I'm not willing to spend the time/effort to prove that their are people out there that would purchase something that choose not to when it is available for free, anyone should be able to look at their own life an realize that it happens.
Either way, the Record Companies own the rights to the songs. So it really doesn't matter if it is beneficial to them to offer songs for free or not. They choose not to, and that is their right.
You don't know anyone that would have paid for a CD(or song), but instead downloaded it? I do.
Too bad for her the cost to give those copies away was $54K.
Overkill is the point. That's what makes it a deterrent.
In case you were unaware, you don't have to upload 3000 copies of a file for 3000 people to be able to download the file.
Someone, or several people, may have been willing to pay for the songs. However, going back to marketing 101, they are not going to pay for them if they are made available for free from this lady. So, by putting these songs out there to be downloaded for free, she lowered the retail value of the songs and cost the Record Company money and potential sales.
Also, in your marketing 101: A product is only worth what someone is willing to sell it for.
If someone owns something and someone else wants to buy it, they have to come to an agreement on the price. The price must fall within what the buyer wants to pay and what the seller is willing to sell for. Otherwise their is no sale and the seller keeps the goods and the buyer goes without.
Supply & Demand; Not just demand, and not just supply.
This is the major factor that impedes me too. I could ride a bike to work, and would enjoy it. However, I do not want to build a sweat and than have to work for 8 hours.
Specially when those "others" have nuclear weapons.
That's the Laissez Faire Capitalist Spirit!
In what area has Obama increased freedom in the USA?
If I recall correctly, he changed the status quo of the "war on drugs" in that, the Federal Government will no longer prosecute if the State does not. A.k.a. they will no longer target Medical Marijuana in places like California.
That certainly increases freedom in the USA.
A good thing that sometimes people feel their own destruction is worth the destruction of their enemy! I mean, imagine a world where someone killed himself to kill his enemy; that world would be pure lunacy.
Well, the U.S. was able to fund Napoleon (And acquire a fair bit of land too!)
/Louisiana Purchase
still a waste of $40.
Then WB is betting that they will make more in DVD sales to the public than they lose in sales to Netflix. If it turns out to be false, they can always switch back.
Redbox used to be able to pre-order (Like other rental companies and retail stores) so that they could have the machines stocked and ready to go on the release day. Now they've lost that privilage and have in turn resorted to purchasing copies from walmart, etc.
If we hold true that Netflix will continue to purchase the same number of DVDs, jsut 28 das later (As the GP said), than if someone who was going to "be good customers and rent the movie" from Netflix chooses to download and watch it, WB has not lost any sales or profit.
It is only going ot be a loss for WB if Netflix chooses to purchase less DVDs. And even then, it's only a loss of the number of DVD sales does not go up enough to cover the decline in Netflix purchases.
Somewhere along the line (Around the time VHS switched to DVD), they removed the pricey advanced copy and started selling the $15-$25 copy to the public and rental companies on the same day. (Rental companies can order in advance so they have them available to rent on day 1).
The way Obfuscant ended his comment was a bit of "flamebait", but his (or her) point is still valid. Someone's waited X number of weeks to see a movie already for various reasons (money being a main one), what's another 28 days going to be?
If you weren't looking to buy it and are an avid Netflix user, you probably only pay attention to when Netflix tells you the movie you've saved is available and not DVD release dates (Or at least that's what I do).
not quite as a business
Glad you put the "Not quite as" in there. Because every company I've owrked for it's the "who you know" that get promoted before the "what you know". And usually the "what you know" get stuck in a position because they do it well and the company would suffer if they moved up, but the "know nothing" can move up the chain without them being missed in their current position.
How does the reform come about if she refuses to sign it?
If your running around building up a sweat, then yes, you would need a new shirt everyday. However, (assuming you wear an undershirt), your polo is not dirty (nor smelling) after a single use.
:-)
But, if you personally have an issue with body odor and need a new shirt everyday to keep from smelling, than go ahead and get 4 shirts