There's a problem with your logic. If the decline in music sales is the result of decling music quality, and not that people are stealing, what exactly are people stealing? It doesn't make sense that people are stealing because there isn't quality music. If there isn't quality, what are they stealing?
If you are pointing out that a few songs are not worth the $18 CD price tag, then they should buy the singles and not steal.
If you are pointing out people steal catalogue music because a viable market of hit or Top40 doesn't exist, you are ignoring the viable catalogue market.
If these sites are so useful, then the sites shouldn't have any trouble paying for the license to publish material which isn't theirs. Just like books, music, movies, research papers, and all other copyrighted material, it is important to protect the copyright. If I find utility in publishing today's New York Times or the newest Harry Potter, it isn't my choice to put it on the internet, it is the copyright holders.
As many college students know, searching Lexus Nexus, and research abstracts are extremely useful. But they also require large fees from the University to pay the original copyright holders. Likewise, if some is going to publish someone else's lyrics, they should have to pay fees to the original copyright holder. And if that means, charging the end consumer, so be it. Record companies may find it in their interest to publish lyric catalogues at a loss in order to drive sales.
Anyone who argues in favor of copyright looters should spend some time in Basra and let me know how that feels. I, like everyone else, prefers free to paying, but until they figure out cold fusion, you can't get something for nothing.
Riders have to be voted on to be attached to a bill. They aren't just put there with glue. Any representative who says "I didn't know I voted for X" is playing politics.
Let me just proposed a couple of scenarios where this doesn't work:
1. When you have a group of friends and non-friends who "Reply-to-All" in email discussions. 2. On the job search, and receiving email from potential job leads. I cannot see any circumstance where a potential employer would pay money to contact a potential employee. 3. Any scenario where you are looking to receive email from strangers, auctions, dating sites, etc.
I use Hotmail's Exclusive filter and it works brilliantly. I scoop out the good emails from the Junk folder, which amounts to about 2-3 a week. I leave my mailing lists in the junk file so that they are automatically deleted every week.
kazaalite is great. I do find a certain irony though. There someone who creates a program that steals money from the people who create a program that steals money from musicians.
How is a conflict of interest: if the company that provides a valuable service charges more for it? Reference lists of books are accessible and free to anyone who wants to look, e.g go to LOC, your local library. Amazon.com has provided an incredibly valuable service of making that information even more accessible. This service isn't provided by so-called "cheaper" stores.
The data about the accident should be used against (or for) you. It is an accurate description of the events. If you are at fault, the data would show that, and the converse is true. This is no more of a privacy invasion than asking the eyewitnesses to the event. Given that eyewitnesses are notoriously wrong, this should be a welcome advance.
The article mentions the guy who lied. He claimed the brakes failed, but the data showed otherwise. The data should be used against him and he should be responsbile.
The premium broadband content on CNN is free to TimeWarner Roadrunner subscribers. I think this is a nice perq of being a subscriber and adds to the goodwill I have toward the service.
More time is spent reading and writing about Spam, than actually dealing with it. My work email never gets spam, and my personal email is set to exclusive. Anyone who really has to deal with spam has to be asking for it, or at least not careful enough to prevent it. Get over it. It's part of life.
You are saying the e-tailers should be exempt from paying taxes because their business models fail when they have to play by the same rules as everybody else. This would be called a subsidy. Tell me why e-tailers and traditional mail order companies need subsidies.
don't know if anyone is still reading these posts. but you can get to the site by going to simplemp3s.com. my only concern is that to download albums, you have to install a java app. is there a way to determine what this app does?
btw, if you search for any cd on kazaa and add the term you get full album listing with proper song titles and are ripped at 192k.
If people are using ebay, to buy and sell stuff between the thousands of different people, is that considered a corporate purchase or a demoratic one? How about Half.com or zShops?
If people spend a lot of their day on Slashdot, but read the resources of 100's of different articles that are posted, Slashdot would still boast the most usage. Just because the top four account account for the most traffic, that doesn't mean anything else is excluded.
so as a Marketing Major, you have no real-world experience. if the book said so, then it must be true.
I don't mean to be too mean, but there are a lot of tiers of advertising. Obviously, companies like the Gap would not do this. But the Gap also doesn't do direct mail. Likewise, I get address label advertisements in direct mail, but they aren't advertising on "Friends." Different strategies work for different companies.
This practice already occurs at the grocery store. If you buy Coca-Cola, you get a coupon for $.30 off of Pepsi. The marketing practice is sound and legitimate.
Also, if you don't like the Gator software, don't download it. If you like AudioGalaxy and you don't like Gator. Tough Luck! That is how AudioGalaxy makes money.
The Slashdot community in general damns Microsoft users to their fate because they are too "dumb" to use a "real" operating system. Likewise, wise up, and download responsibly.
Everyone has probably received the opt-out notices from your banks and credit cards. The opt-out policies are humorous and scary. Information that may be shared includes information from your application, from account statements, any other provided by you, and information obtained from other sources. Other information may not be shared. This information may be shared with associated financial institutions. It may also be shared with non-financial institutions. Do you see the humor?
I called the Citibank representative and asked him if in plain English how this policy affected anything. He said that it pretty much didn't do anything. But, while on the phone I specifically asked to opt-out, which they honored. So the little pieces of paper do nothing, but you can call and ask to avoid the vending of your information. I then received in the mail, a sheet that said I should call the top five credit agencies because they sell information. But the notice also said that there were many more agencies I would have to contact to completely avoid the vending of my info. At this point, you just have to live with it.
Playboy had an interesting article about protecting your privacy and the different levels of identity cloaking about a year ago, as well as the legal tradeoffs. I wish I had more info on it to share.
It is important that everyone opt-out. Currently the rates are below 10%. Now Citibank will lobby Congress to say that people do not really care about their privacy and that further costly legislation is not merited. People, you vote with your dollars and your actions, not your words.
Humans take rediculous precautions to prevent unknown extraterrestial materials infecting us. It is irresponsible and immoral to project the blueprints of our living matter into any possible extraterrestial environment.
Here's one slippery slope of targetted advertising. The more varied our interests, the more varied the advertising. As underground or mainstream an audience is, that's the advertising they would recieve. This is until advertising is a mirror reflection of ourselves. Might one consequence be we don't like what we see? The flip side is we don't want others to see it either.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a problem with your logic. If the decline in music sales is the result of decling music quality, and not that people are stealing, what exactly are people stealing? It doesn't make sense that people are stealing because there isn't quality music. If there isn't quality, what are they stealing?
If you are pointing out that a few songs are not worth the $18 CD price tag, then they should buy the singles and not steal.
If you are pointing out people steal catalogue music because a viable market of hit or Top40 doesn't exist, you are ignoring the viable catalogue market.
If these sites are so useful, then the sites shouldn't have any trouble paying for the license to publish material which isn't theirs. Just like books, music, movies, research papers, and all other copyrighted material, it is important to protect the copyright. If I find utility in publishing today's New York Times or the newest Harry Potter, it isn't my choice to put it on the internet, it is the copyright holders.
As many college students know, searching Lexus Nexus, and research abstracts are extremely useful. But they also require large fees from the University to pay the original copyright holders. Likewise, if some is going to publish someone else's lyrics, they should have to pay fees to the original copyright holder. And if that means, charging the end consumer, so be it. Record companies may find it in their interest to publish lyric catalogues at a loss in order to drive sales.
Anyone who argues in favor of copyright looters should spend some time in Basra and let me know how that feels. I, like everyone else, prefers free to paying, but until they figure out cold fusion, you can't get something for nothing.
Riders have to be voted on to be attached to a bill. They aren't just put there with glue. Any representative who says "I didn't know I voted for X" is playing politics.
Let me just proposed a couple of scenarios where this doesn't work:
1. When you have a group of friends and non-friends who "Reply-to-All" in email discussions.
2. On the job search, and receiving email from potential job leads. I cannot see any circumstance where a potential employer would pay money to contact a potential employee.
3. Any scenario where you are looking to receive email from strangers, auctions, dating sites, etc.
I use Hotmail's Exclusive filter and it works brilliantly. I scoop out the good emails from the Junk folder, which amounts to about 2-3 a week. I leave my mailing lists in the junk file so that they are automatically deleted every week.
this place sounds worse than the Soup Nazi!
kazaalite is great. I do find a certain irony though. There someone who creates a program that steals money from the people who create a program that steals money from musicians.
your PC just sitting there is not worth $150/year. If it were, then the company would just buy one for $450, and depreciate it over 3 years.
How is a conflict of interest: if the company that provides a valuable service charges more for it? Reference lists of books are accessible and free to anyone who wants to look, e.g go to LOC, your local library. Amazon.com has provided an incredibly valuable service of making that information even more accessible. This service isn't provided by so-called "cheaper" stores.
The data about the accident should be used against (or for) you. It is an accurate description of the events. If you are at fault, the data would show that, and the converse is true. This is no more of a privacy invasion than asking the eyewitnesses to the event. Given that eyewitnesses are notoriously wrong, this should be a welcome advance.
The article mentions the guy who lied. He claimed the brakes failed, but the data showed otherwise. The data should be used against him and he should be responsbile.
i remember when the phrase "two dot.com millionaires" was a term of endearment not scorn
The premium broadband content on CNN is free to TimeWarner Roadrunner subscribers. I think this is a nice perq of being a subscriber and adds to the goodwill I have toward the service.
More time is spent reading and writing about Spam, than actually dealing with it. My work email never gets spam, and my personal email is set to exclusive. Anyone who really has to deal with spam has to be asking for it, or at least not careful enough to prevent it. Get over it. It's part of life.
so in other words, you have no idea what you are talking about.
You are saying the e-tailers should be exempt from paying taxes because their business models fail when they have to play by the same rules as everybody else. This would be called a subsidy. Tell me why e-tailers and traditional mail order companies need subsidies.
every other economic transaction is taxed. there is no logical explanation why these should be exempt.
how many chips are now in phones? is a single chip a cost and power advantage?
check out simplemp3s.com. it's the same site. if you try to d/l an album, you have to install a java app. any word on what it does?
don't know if anyone is still reading these posts. but you can get to the site by going to simplemp3s.com. my only concern is that to download albums, you have to install a java app. is there a way to determine what this app does?
btw, if you search for any cd on kazaa and add the term you get full album listing with proper song titles and are ripped at 192k.
since all light is made up of particles, wouldn't all of the light (particles) that we've created over the past 100 years have reached further?
If people spend a lot of their day on Slashdot, but read the resources of 100's of different articles that are posted, Slashdot would still boast the most usage. Just because the top four account account for the most traffic, that doesn't mean anything else is excluded.
so as a Marketing Major, you have no real-world experience. if the book said so, then it must be true.
I don't mean to be too mean, but there are a lot of tiers of advertising. Obviously, companies like the Gap would not do this. But the Gap also doesn't do direct mail. Likewise, I get address label advertisements in direct mail, but they aren't advertising on "Friends." Different strategies work for different companies.
This practice already occurs at the grocery store. If you buy Coca-Cola, you get a coupon for $.30 off of Pepsi. The marketing practice is sound and legitimate.
Also, if you don't like the Gator software, don't download it. If you like AudioGalaxy and you don't like Gator. Tough Luck! That is how AudioGalaxy makes money.
The Slashdot community in general damns Microsoft users to their fate because they are too "dumb" to use a "real" operating system. Likewise, wise up, and download responsibly.
I called the Citibank representative and asked him if in plain English how this policy affected anything. He said that it pretty much didn't do anything. But, while on the phone I specifically asked to opt-out, which they honored. So the little pieces of paper do nothing, but you can call and ask to avoid the vending of your information. I then received in the mail, a sheet that said I should call the top five credit agencies because they sell information. But the notice also said that there were many more agencies I would have to contact to completely avoid the vending of my info. At this point, you just have to live with it.
Playboy had an interesting article about protecting your privacy and the different levels of identity cloaking about a year ago, as well as the legal tradeoffs. I wish I had more info on it to share.
It is important that everyone opt-out. Currently the rates are below 10%. Now Citibank will lobby Congress to say that people do not really care about their privacy and that further costly legislation is not merited. People, you vote with your dollars and your actions, not your words.
Humans take rediculous precautions to prevent unknown extraterrestial materials infecting us. It is irresponsible and immoral to project the blueprints of our living matter into any possible extraterrestial environment.
Here's one slippery slope of targetted advertising. The more varied our interests, the more varied the advertising. As underground or mainstream an audience is, that's the advertising they would recieve. This is until advertising is a mirror reflection of ourselves. Might one consequence be we don't like what we see? The flip side is we don't want others to see it either.