>I don't understand how Walmart expects to sell >this stuff. The price tag that is on this kind >of computer will appeal to the Lowest Common >Denominator customer.
that is exactly how they will sell this stuff. Ask anyone in business and they can explain how walmart is king of this business model. This is how walmart became the worlds largest company. This has nothing to do with whether anyone here likes/dislikes walmart, its just a matter of their business model.
You make a couple very fair points above; namely that the RIAA does produce a considerable amount of good music, and that the theft of music infringes on their existing business model. However in defense of the previous post I believe you missed the point. The RIAA and the MPAA continue polices in hope of stopping per to per sharing altogether, but have made virtually no effort to incorporate internet sharing technology into their business model. Had the spent their energy here, they may have had a solution already.
Instead, the RIAA missed the boat entirely (the MPAA has a little time to catch up), and cannot win this contest by litigation. This by no means justifies theft of music, but they will not be able to un-invent this technological shift. In the six years they could have addressed this problem, they have spent all their time and money in lawsuits and other misdirected efforts to curb all trading, rather than using this technology to make them more money. This letter to corporations is a mute point as people will trade at home just as well. Ultimately, the RIAA reminds me of the Catholic Church in the 16th century wishing the printing press would just go away.
Slashdot Mirror
>I don't understand how Walmart expects to sell >this stuff. The price tag that is on this kind >of computer will appeal to the Lowest Common >Denominator customer.
that is exactly how they will sell this stuff. Ask anyone in business and they can explain how walmart is king of this business model. This is how walmart became the worlds largest company. This has nothing to do with whether anyone here likes/dislikes walmart, its just a matter of their business model.
You make a couple very fair points above; namely that the RIAA does produce a considerable amount of good music, and that the theft of music infringes on their existing business model. However in defense of the previous post I believe you missed the point. The RIAA and the MPAA continue polices in hope of stopping per to per sharing altogether, but have made virtually no effort to incorporate internet sharing technology into their business model. Had the spent their energy here, they may have had a solution already.
Instead, the RIAA missed the boat entirely (the MPAA has a little time to catch up), and cannot win this contest by litigation. This by no means justifies theft of music, but they will not be able to un-invent this technological shift. In the six years they could have addressed this problem, they have spent all their time and money in lawsuits and other misdirected efforts to curb all trading, rather than using this technology to make them more money. This letter to corporations is a mute point as people will trade at home just as well. Ultimately, the RIAA reminds me of the Catholic Church in the 16th century wishing the printing press would just go away.