I think music stores base their profit on their markups on cd's. The RIAA base price of $14 gets marked up by varying degrees by music stores. I worked at a music store last year (A&B Sound in Vancouver) where they sold the cd's for very little over last year's base price of $13, so you could buy cd's for an avg. $13-$15 CDN per cd. This year, since the RIAA price raise, you can get them for $14-$17 a cd there. Now, since the west coast of Canada is reputably the cheapest place in the world to buy music cd's (largely because of the A&B Sound chain based here), we have it a bit better than other places (e.g. $30 in Australia, $20 in America, $18 in eastern Canada). That might give you an idea how much different music stores make on their cd sales.
I don't know, however, what the RIAA breakdown is. Does anyone know how the base $14 price gets split up? What's the artist's cut? What's the RIAA's cut? What's the promotional and manufacturing costs?
Thanks for the article! It's great when someone takes the time to debunk biased and inaccurate reporting. It's not surprising the RIAA is trying to create the image of lost revenues... the movie industry has been doing it for years (although they don't have a handy scapegoat like Napster to blame).
mattdm:I'd suggest that the redirection page should be a plain-text version of the content, with a footnote note that compliance with certain standards is required to view the fancy web page. cicadia:It won't be followed, because of the amount of redundant content that needs to be maintained on the plain version of a site
I think the original poster was advocating a plain-text redirection page, and not a duplicate plain version of a fancy site.:-) But I agree with your argument itself. It would be far to time-consuming and unworkable to make web designers maintain 2 complete versions of a site.
Why didn't you just pick "hotmale_sucks_ass@hotmail.com" ?;-) (PROBABLY not the imagry you want to connotate, but it would of worked)
Unfortunately, hotmale.com is a porn site, so that one would have been harder to explain to my relatives.:-) I also was getting tired of trying to get a hotmail address at the time, and moved onto another provider.
You can't renamed pets that contain the words "osi" in them
Yeah... that's one of the abuses my company tries to avoid, and I have no problem with that. Users need to get in touch with webmail admin sometimes and we should make it as easy as possible for them to do so. Any provider that doesn't reserve those kinds of usernames is negligent and deserve the headaches that result (i.e. your friend's fun).
I don't think webmail providers should reserve "offensive" words like "sucks", "fuck", "sex" etc., however. What happens to user Jeff Uckerman who innocently uses "jeffuckerman" as his email address?
This may only be slightly related to the trademark protection story, so feel free to moderate me off-topic.:-)
I encountered a similar situation to the "sucks" domains, when trying to get a Hotmail account username. (Yes, Hotmail/MSN is evil, but this was years ago when I was a newbie). After trying a bunch of usernames and finding them all taken, I started to express my ire and frustration by trying variations of "hotmailsucks". They had taken steps to protect their trademarked name against such usage, by not allowing any username to have the word "Hotmail" in it. Pretty smart on their part I suppose, since I couldn't have my "hotmail_sucks_ass" username. (I eventually had to drop the hotmail to end up with a lovely email address that I was embarrassed to share with my relatives.:-) ). They have even made any variation of "hotmail" a reserved or ineligible word that you cannot use in your account's personal information, so you can't have it appear on your outgoing messages. Their terms of use say you can't use their services in an attempt to be defamatory etc.
I guess my point is that email providers have been blocking their trademarks from use for years, and some even block potentially offensive words altogether. I wouldn't have even gotten "sucks" past some webmail providers. No one seems to have gotten upset over intellectual freedom in these cases, at least not enough to post a story on/. Considering email usernames constitute a large part of people's identities on the net, why shouldn't we be able to use any username we please so long as it's not already in use? I've heard all the arguments for potential abuse (I work for a webmail provider) but I'm still not convinced.
I wonder if the authorities screamed "we'll prosecute!" as loudly when it was a celebrity that was demonstrating, instead of some students pulling a prank.
I guess you missed the tongue-in-cheek reference I made regarding stereotyping. I admittedly lumped the poster in with the STEREOTYPE of sexist males, but I don't assume the poster is actually sexist any more than I am actually a rabid feminist.
I also considered commenting on the need for a gender-neutral singular pronoun in English, but since my silly post was already way off-topic, I thought I should make it short. Too late now I suppose.
The basic point I was trying to make is if he'd read the article carefully, he wouldn't have assumed Ilana was a guy's name. And I realize I'm assuming the poster is a man himself. Everyone's guilty of something in a Politically Correct world, dontcha know.
... What is the solution? How is government funding going to help poorer income families access ISPs and broadband?
I guess I'm just not seeing your point. Yes, all children should have equal access to computer resources, but isn't that why schools and libraries have computers in the first place? And yes, children with further computer access in the home have an advantage over those who don't. But families with poorer incomes likely don't think broadband computer access is a huge priority when feeding and clothing their kids is more important.
However, the report itself probably does provide the statistics and analysis that could help schools utilize their computer resources better, or vindicate those that are doing well already. As a progress gauge, the report is useful. As an impetus for social change, I just don't see it.
By the way, what are the stats for girls? It's great to know that young boys out there are playing lots of Quake and such, but how are girls using computers? How often? What are they doing? Do they get equal access or benefit? Might be interesting to know, since most university computer science classes are still overloaded with men.
... for an American to bring up the "right to bear arms" issue.
Looks like 8 minutes.
Wow, you really held yourself back this time.
Good job of combatting the sterotype of gun-packing Americans. Do you still think that amendment has any bearing on your lives today? Do you still think any problem or issue can be solved by a gun? Interesting.
Here's to hoping you grow up as a nation one day. Your neighbours to the north would certainly appreciate it.
Seems to me to be a great place to film TV and movies with a government agency theme. X-Files perhaps? And considering the money that production companies pay to use great locations, wouldn't it be a great idea for funding?
Then again, how many productions happen in North Carolina anyway?
I seemed to have hit a nerve there. I will accept your insults (i.e. mental instability, hypocrisy) with a smile/maniacal grin since I was guilty of doing the same to the original Poster. However, I must respond to your other comments:
Yes, generalizations about Americans are overdone, just as they are about Canadians. I should have been clearer in my statement. It should have read "Because of the [perception of] the high crime rate, lower standard of living" etc. No, not every American is an idiot criminal, but the crime rates are higher in the U.S. as a whole when compared to Canada. This is likely due to the larger cities and larger population, but the perception of more crime there exists. And the "right to bear arms" issue doesn't lessen the perception of the U.S. as a potentially dangerous place to visit.
The ignorance generalization largely comes from meeting Americans and having to continually correct bad assumptions about Canada (e.g. heavy snow all year round, an inferior health system due to socialism, etc.) Everyone I know has had to do the same in their dealings with Americans, so it leads to an overall view of the U.S. as fostering ignorance about other countries.
I stand by my assertion that the U.S. has a lower standard of living, based on the U.N. voting Canada #1 in living standards many years running. I would never blame the low standard of living on immigration though! Immigration strengthens a country, not weakens it. I find it interesting you blame "foreign peoples" for your country's difficulties, as that usually denotes a discriminatory attitude.
I agree you should be proud of your military, as it is a world leader and likely the world's strongest. I was merely pointing out that many Americans rely on their military strength to make an unrelated point. Yes, the U.S. could likely crush the Canadian military, but how does that prove that "Everyone knows the US is the best country in the world to live within"? Everyone does not think that, no matter how many armed forces and guns the U.S. has, and it's a dangerous attitude to have.
I think the Canadians on the board are trying to emphasize the strength of Canadian ingenuity. That basically covers anyone raised as a Canadian, despite where they ended up in their adult life. Maybe it is trying to have it both ways. But my point was to correct the original Poster. If he had read some more posts before making his statement, he might have noticed the Canadians admitting basketball was invented within the U.S., not within Canada.
As for the "Canada, pure of spirit" comment, I have no idea where that came from. Can anyone out there explain it to me? I personally prefer not to live in ignorance. That goes for any factual inaccuracies I may have made here as well.
What are you talking about? I avoid even travelling to the U.S. when I can help it. As for moving there, most Canadians hesitate despite the lure of higher salaries. Why? Because of the high crime rate, lower standard of living, and no universal health care. But most of all because most Canadians can't stand American attitudes and ignorance.
As for the "defenseless neighbour... in a war who would win" comment, why do Americans always feel the need to threaten war on everyone? It's like a schoolyard bully who always has to prove how tough he is, because he feels inferior to everyone else.
And, if you knew how to read, you would have noticed the many Canadian comments re: basketball stated it was invented in the U.S. but by a Canadian. But considering the poor state of your education system, why should we expect you to be able to read properly, let alone know anything accurate about other countries?
I don't know where your friends are living, but it must be somewhere really remote. My experience with Canada Post has been great. My mail takes between 1-3 days to reach it's recipients.
And of course all of Canada is the same temperature all the time?
You do realize the country is larger than the United States, don't you? I don't expect the climate is the same across the entire continental U.S., so why should you expect all of Canada to be snowy and cold just because it is north of Minnesota?
Living in Vancouver for example means mild winters (i.e. only 1 day of snow this year) and hot summers. Canada does not always follow the myth of the "Great White North" and it's a great place to live.
Try "Wings of Desire" (1987) and it's sequel "Faraway, So Close" (1993). They're not as accessible as "Until the end of the World", but with a good story and overall look.
I've heard "Buena Vista Social Club" (1999) is a great documentary but I haven't seen it yet. And "Million Dollar Hotel" (2000) was good, but not released in very many places. It's yet another U2 connection as it's Bono's story idea, a U2 soundtrack, and he's in it as himself very briefly.
Avoid "The End of Violence" (1997), which I found pointless and boring IMHO.
I agree with Perdida... thanks for the reference to a brilliant movie! I will admit that I watched the film due to the U2 connection (in the awesome soundtrack and their friendship with Wim Wenders), but the movie itself was amazing. Great cast, with Neill, Hurt, Dommartin, Max Von Sydow, and a great sweeping storyline through countless countries and languages. Wenders' other films are good, Wings of Desire in particular, but UTEOTW is still my favourite.
Too bad it's a bit dated now that it's 2000 and the film's predictions were a little off on the technology. Although it's not too far off the mark on the concepts like the camera and the onboard car navigation system. The Greenpeace space station isn't quite there yet though.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I think music stores base their profit on their markups on cd's. The RIAA base price of $14 gets marked up by varying degrees by music stores. I worked at a music store last year (A&B Sound in Vancouver) where they sold the cd's for very little over last year's base price of $13, so you could buy cd's for an avg. $13-$15 CDN per cd. This year, since the RIAA price raise, you can get them for $14-$17 a cd there. Now, since the west coast of Canada is reputably the cheapest place in the world to buy music cd's (largely because of the A&B Sound chain based here), we have it a bit better than other places (e.g. $30 in Australia, $20 in America, $18 in eastern Canada). That might give you an idea how much different music stores make on their cd sales.
I don't know, however, what the RIAA breakdown is. Does anyone know how the base $14 price gets split up? What's the artist's cut? What's the RIAA's cut? What's the promotional and manufacturing costs?
Thanks for the article! It's great when someone takes the time to debunk biased and inaccurate reporting. It's not surprising the RIAA is trying to create the image of lost revenues... the movie industry has been doing it for years (although they don't have a handy scapegoat like Napster to blame).
Great job!
mattdm: I'd suggest that the redirection page should be a plain-text version of the content, with a footnote note that compliance with certain standards is required to view the fancy web page.
cicadia: It won't be followed, because of the amount of redundant content that needs to be maintained on the plain version of a site
I think the original poster was advocating a plain-text redirection page, and not a duplicate plain version of a fancy site. :-) But I agree with your argument itself. It would be far to time-consuming and unworkable to make web designers maintain 2 complete versions of a site.
- Jetgirl
"Keep it together, keepittogether..."
Why didn't you just pick "hotmale_sucks_ass@hotmail.com" ? ;-) (PROBABLY not the imagry you want to connotate, but it would of worked)
:-) I also was getting tired of trying to get a hotmail address at the time, and moved onto another provider.
Unfortunately, hotmale.com is a porn site, so that one would have been harder to explain to my relatives.
You can't renamed pets that contain the words "osi" in them
What's wrong with "osi" by the way?
Good point. Thanks for the insight.
Yeah... that's one of the abuses my company tries to avoid, and I have no problem with that. Users need to get in touch with webmail admin sometimes and we should make it as easy as possible for them to do so. Any provider that doesn't reserve those kinds of usernames is negligent and deserve the headaches that result (i.e. your friend's fun).
I don't think webmail providers should reserve "offensive" words like "sucks", "fuck", "sex" etc., however. What happens to user Jeff Uckerman who innocently uses "jeffuckerman" as his email address?
Jetgirl
(hmm, maybe I should get a sig)
This may only be slightly related to the trademark protection story, so feel free to moderate me off-topic. :-)
:-) ). They have even made any variation of "hotmail" a reserved or ineligible word that you cannot use in your account's personal information, so you can't have it appear on your outgoing messages. Their terms of use say you can't use their services in an attempt to be defamatory etc.
/. Considering email usernames constitute a large part of people's identities on the net, why shouldn't we be able to use any username we please so long as it's not already in use? I've heard all the arguments for potential abuse (I work for a webmail provider) but I'm still not convinced.
I encountered a similar situation to the "sucks" domains, when trying to get a Hotmail account username. (Yes, Hotmail/MSN is evil, but this was years ago when I was a newbie). After trying a bunch of usernames and finding them all taken, I started to express my ire and frustration by trying variations of "hotmailsucks". They had taken steps to protect their trademarked name against such usage, by not allowing any username to have the word "Hotmail" in it. Pretty smart on their part I suppose, since I couldn't have my "hotmail_sucks_ass" username. (I eventually had to drop the hotmail to end up with a lovely email address that I was embarrassed to share with my relatives.
I guess my point is that email providers have been blocking their trademarks from use for years, and some even block potentially offensive words altogether. I wouldn't have even gotten "sucks" past some webmail providers. No one seems to have gotten upset over intellectual freedom in these cases, at least not enough to post a story on
What do other slashdotters think?
Jetgirl
I wonder if the authorities screamed "we'll prosecute!" as loudly when it was a celebrity that was demonstrating, instead of some students pulling a prank.
I guess you missed the tongue-in-cheek reference I made regarding stereotyping. I admittedly lumped the poster in with the STEREOTYPE of sexist males, but I don't assume the poster is actually sexist any more than I am actually a rabid feminist.
I also considered commenting on the need for a gender-neutral singular pronoun in English, but since my silly post was already way off-topic, I thought I should make it short. Too late now I suppose.
The basic point I was trying to make is if he'd read the article carefully, he wouldn't have assumed Ilana was a guy's name. And I realize I'm assuming the poster is a man himself. Everyone's guilty of something in a Politically Correct world, dontcha know.
Jetgirl
If I took his essay, put my name on it and sold it, he might sing a different tune.
Why did you automatically assume the author, Ilana Mercer, was a man?
Just moderate this (-1, offtopic)
Jetgirl
... What is the solution? How is government funding going to help poorer income families access ISPs and broadband?
I guess I'm just not seeing your point. Yes, all children should have equal access to computer resources, but isn't that why schools and libraries have computers in the first place? And yes, children with further computer access in the home have an advantage over those who don't. But families with poorer incomes likely don't think broadband computer access is a huge priority when feeding and clothing their kids is more important.
However, the report itself probably does provide the statistics and analysis that could help schools utilize their computer resources better, or vindicate those that are doing well already. As a progress gauge, the report is useful. As an impetus for social change, I just don't see it.
By the way, what are the stats for girls? It's great to know that young boys out there are playing lots of Quake and such, but how are girls using computers? How often? What are they doing? Do they get equal access or benefit? Might be interesting to know, since most university computer science classes are still overloaded with men.
Jetgirl
Looks like 8 minutes.
Wow, you really held yourself back this time.
Good job of combatting the sterotype of gun-packing Americans. Do you still think that amendment has any bearing on your lives today? Do you still think any problem or issue can be solved by a gun? Interesting.
Here's to hoping you grow up as a nation one day. Your neighbours to the north would certainly appreciate it.
Seems to me to be a great place to film TV and movies with a government agency theme. X-Files perhaps? And considering the money that production companies pay to use great locations, wouldn't it be a great idea for funding?
Then again, how many productions happen in North Carolina anyway?
I seemed to have hit a nerve there. I will accept your insults (i.e. mental instability, hypocrisy) with a smile/maniacal grin since I was guilty of doing the same to the original Poster. However, I must respond to your other comments:
:-)
Yes, generalizations about Americans are overdone, just as they are about Canadians. I should have been clearer in my statement. It should have read "Because of the [perception of] the high crime rate, lower standard of living" etc. No, not every American is an idiot criminal, but the crime rates are higher in the U.S. as a whole when compared to Canada. This is likely due to the larger cities and larger population, but the perception of more crime there exists. And the "right to bear arms" issue doesn't lessen the perception of the U.S. as a potentially dangerous place to visit.
The ignorance generalization largely comes from meeting Americans and having to continually correct bad assumptions about Canada (e.g. heavy snow all year round, an inferior health system due to socialism, etc.) Everyone I know has had to do the same in their dealings with Americans, so it leads to an overall view of the U.S. as fostering ignorance about other countries.
I stand by my assertion that the U.S. has a lower standard of living, based on the U.N. voting Canada #1 in living standards many years running. I would never blame the low standard of living on immigration though! Immigration strengthens a country, not weakens it. I find it interesting you blame "foreign peoples" for your country's difficulties, as that usually denotes a discriminatory attitude.
I agree you should be proud of your military, as it is a world leader and likely the world's strongest. I was merely pointing out that many Americans rely on their military strength to make an unrelated point. Yes, the U.S. could likely crush the Canadian military, but how does that prove that "Everyone knows the US is the best country in the world to live within"? Everyone does not think that, no matter how many armed forces and guns the U.S. has, and it's a dangerous attitude to have.
I think the Canadians on the board are trying to emphasize the strength of Canadian ingenuity. That basically covers anyone raised as a Canadian, despite where they ended up in their adult life. Maybe it is trying to have it both ways. But my point was to correct the original Poster. If he had read some more posts before making his statement, he might have noticed the Canadians admitting basketball was invented within the U.S., not within Canada.
As for the "Canada, pure of spirit" comment, I have no idea where that came from. Can anyone out there explain it to me? I personally prefer not to live in ignorance. That goes for any factual inaccuracies I may have made here as well.
And yes, I was a little touchy myself.
What are you talking about? I avoid even travelling to the U.S. when I can help it. As for moving there, most Canadians hesitate despite the lure of higher salaries. Why? Because of the high crime rate, lower standard of living, and no universal health care. But most of all because most Canadians can't stand American attitudes and ignorance.
... in a war who would win" comment, why do Americans always feel the need to threaten war on everyone? It's like a schoolyard bully who always has to prove how tough he is, because he feels inferior to everyone else.
As for the "defenseless neighbour
And, if you knew how to read, you would have noticed the many Canadian comments re: basketball stated it was invented in the U.S. but by a Canadian. But considering the poor state of your education system, why should we expect you to be able to read properly, let alone know anything accurate about other countries?
Invented by a Canadian - true.
But the U.S. plays it really well, I'll grant you that.
True... lacrosse is an aboriginal sport predating both countries. However, it is the national sport of Canada which might explain the confusion.
Ha ha... good point.
Yes, 1 day of snow this winter season (thus far at least).
Strange... same place I live. Sucks to be them I guess. I've had no problems.
I don't know where your friends are living, but it must be somewhere really remote. My experience with Canada Post has been great. My mail takes between 1-3 days to reach it's recipients.
And of course all of Canada is the same temperature all the time? You do realize the country is larger than the United States, don't you? I don't expect the climate is the same across the entire continental U.S., so why should you expect all of Canada to be snowy and cold just because it is north of Minnesota?
Living in Vancouver for example means mild winters (i.e. only 1 day of snow this year) and hot summers. Canada does not always follow the myth of the "Great White North" and it's a great place to live.
Try "Wings of Desire" (1987) and it's sequel "Faraway, So Close" (1993). They're not as accessible as "Until the end of the World", but with a good story and overall look. I've heard "Buena Vista Social Club" (1999) is a great documentary but I haven't seen it yet. And "Million Dollar Hotel" (2000) was good, but not released in very many places. It's yet another U2 connection as it's Bono's story idea, a U2 soundtrack, and he's in it as himself very briefly. Avoid "The End of Violence" (1997), which I found pointless and boring IMHO.
I agree with Perdida... thanks for the reference to a brilliant movie! I will admit that I watched the film due to the U2 connection (in the awesome soundtrack and their friendship with Wim Wenders), but the movie itself was amazing. Great cast, with Neill, Hurt, Dommartin, Max Von Sydow, and a great sweeping storyline through countless countries and languages. Wenders' other films are good, Wings of Desire in particular, but UTEOTW is still my favourite. Too bad it's a bit dated now that it's 2000 and the film's predictions were a little off on the technology. Although it's not too far off the mark on the concepts like the camera and the onboard car navigation system. The Greenpeace space station isn't quite there yet though. :-)