There is a big difference between the two groups and the formats they represent.
The MPAA is making a dumb move in the DeCSS case, but movies are available in several formats: tape, cable, theaters as well as DVD. DVD represents an increase in quality, but you can get any movie on tape.
What the RIAA plans to do is create a system where you will pay per use or per transfer. They want to control the use of music in a way which will abrogate your basic rights to use copyrighted materials.
There's also a major difference in who gets paid. When you see The Perfect Storm, George Clooney gets money from you directly. He gets a share of the gross. Other major stars do as well, as well as any profits from his image in other media.
Even the smaller stars get millions for their participation. The screenwriter and director make a profit as well. Movies are financed in several ways, by private investors as well as studios.
So the MPAA fight is about using formats, not screwing the artists. They get paid anyway.
Also when you see a movie like South Park, you support the fight against the MPAA's censorship. The best way to fight the MPAA is by supporting those who oppose it and the people who make the films the try to censor.
The RIAA represents the record companies and their interests. The artists are the lure they use to cover their own greed and duplicity. They get a ho like Lars Ulrich to whine about Napster when they steal his money and his right to publish songs.
You want to see a pimp in action, look at the major labels. They and their middlemen make $14-15 dollars from every $16, and that's if the artist is lucky. Roger McGuinn said he made more from Mp3.com than from a 40 year recording career worth of albums.
Ever wonder why Ice Cube and Ice T went into movies? Because they don't owe the record company a dime for that work. They do when they record songs. This is like sharecropping. Massa Sony lends you money to live while you pay him back with labor. He gets most of the money from your efforts.
What needs to happen is a way we can pay the artists for their work and not the record comapnies. When they say theft, it's their bottom line, not sweet little Lars, they're worried about.
The movie studios used to do the same thing until the 1950's, when TV gutted their market. Suddenly people ran their own careers and the studios provided financing and support.
Peer to Peer networking is going to be the record company's TV. Their long overdue wakeup call.
They didn't cave. They were prepared to litigate this thing. Didn't you read the letter their lawyer posted? Microsoft caved. Simple as that. Just because you don't hear about something doesn't mean that the site caved. In 90 percent of the cases, the threatening party quietly slinks away. You do not get into this business, information, and cave in to every threat. You apologize when wrong and hope you won't be bankrupted if you're right. But that is something you're taught from day one in Journalism school. The only thing that prevents suits is that libel law and its cousins are so hard to prove, people with means rather sue in the UK, where the law is much easier to prove. Microsoft was threatening because threats work. Except when you're backed by a major corporation, like Slashdot is. Just because they didn't post a big fat letter saying "Fuck you, Bill, sue us" don't assume that it wasn't resolved in their favor. There are going to be many more fights with Microsloth in the future, and the fact they went that far to defend one of you people (AOL would have punked you out in minutes) is something you should consider before yelling sellout. Steve Gilliard Netslaves
Slashdot Mirror
There is a big difference between the two groups and the formats they represent.
The MPAA is making a dumb move in the DeCSS case, but movies are available in several formats: tape, cable, theaters as well as DVD. DVD represents an increase in quality, but you can get any movie on tape.
What the RIAA plans to do is create a system where you will pay per use or per transfer. They want to control the use of music in a way which will abrogate your basic rights to use copyrighted materials.
There's also a major difference in who gets paid. When you see The Perfect Storm, George Clooney gets money from you directly. He gets a share of the gross. Other major stars do as well, as well as any profits from his image in other media.
Even the smaller stars get millions for their participation. The screenwriter and director make a profit as well. Movies are financed in several ways, by private investors as well as studios.
So the MPAA fight is about using formats, not screwing the artists. They get paid anyway.
Also when you see a movie like South Park, you support the fight against the MPAA's censorship. The best way to fight the MPAA is by supporting those who oppose it and the people who make the films the try to censor.
The RIAA represents the record companies and their interests. The artists are the lure they use to cover their own greed and duplicity. They get a ho like Lars Ulrich to whine about Napster when they steal his money and his right to publish songs.
You want to see a pimp in action, look at the major labels. They and their middlemen make $14-15 dollars from every $16, and that's if the artist is lucky. Roger McGuinn said he made more from Mp3.com than from a 40 year recording career worth of albums.
Ever wonder why Ice Cube and Ice T went into movies? Because they don't owe the record company a dime for that work. They do when they record songs. This is like sharecropping. Massa Sony lends you money to live while you pay him back with labor. He gets most of the money from your efforts.
What needs to happen is a way we can pay the artists for their work and not the record comapnies. When they say theft, it's their bottom line, not sweet little Lars, they're worried about.
The movie studios used to do the same thing until the 1950's, when TV gutted their market. Suddenly people ran their own careers and the studios provided financing and support.
Peer to Peer networking is going to be the record company's TV. Their long overdue wakeup call.
There is a real simple solution. Go on Ebay, buy a no OS system and install Win9X on your system. Fuck the OEM box shit.
As long as there's an eBay, you'll be able to do what you want with this crap.
A pig?
Compared to what?
Maybe an HP Wince device might be piggish, but a palm or visor? Yeesh. Come on now.
We're talking something smaller than a deck of cards. Any version. Pig is a Newton. Now relegated to swiping cards at tradeshows.
But any palm works fine. All this is a matter of taste.
They didn't cave. They were prepared to litigate this thing. Didn't you read the letter their lawyer posted? Microsoft caved. Simple as that. Just because you don't hear about something doesn't mean that the site caved. In 90 percent of the cases, the threatening party quietly slinks away. You do not get into this business, information, and cave in to every threat. You apologize when wrong and hope you won't be bankrupted if you're right. But that is something you're taught from day one in Journalism school. The only thing that prevents suits is that libel law and its cousins are so hard to prove, people with means rather sue in the UK, where the law is much easier to prove. Microsoft was threatening because threats work. Except when you're backed by a major corporation, like Slashdot is. Just because they didn't post a big fat letter saying "Fuck you, Bill, sue us" don't assume that it wasn't resolved in their favor. There are going to be many more fights with Microsloth in the future, and the fact they went that far to defend one of you people (AOL would have punked you out in minutes) is something you should consider before yelling sellout. Steve Gilliard Netslaves