Perhaps, but it seems to me people are listening to more music today then ever (probably because of all the one-hit wonders downloaded, etc.) -- but music sales are down. This is what leads the record companies to believe that piracy is hurting their sales.
I do agree, though, that the 90's heralded a lot of great bands with the advent of "Alternative Rock" and the likes of Nirvana, Green Day, etc.
Albhy Galuten, vice president of new media for Universal Records: "I find it incredibly ironic that some people will spend an extra $1,000 on their hard drives just so they can store more music, but they won't pay for the music."
Where does this guy buy hard drives? Seems to me that a 40G HD is $150 Canadian. That's enough to store about 10000 songs, or about 1000 albums. That would cost $18000 dollars to buy those albums new, though, so even if you were paying $1000 for your hard drive, I could still see why you were doing it.
Ah, you're making the same mistake I did long ago when working at a computer shop. You see, the term "hard drive" doesn't just mean the storage device, it's the whole unit!!! Motherboard, CPU, Videocard and all!!
I make tapes (and burn CDs) for other people for much the same way I lend out books I like:
You don't seem to be comparing the same thing here -- unless you're photocopying those books for your friends.
Giving away and selling a product you've used is your right (IMO). But to copy that product and give away the copies is someone else's rights that you're not respecting.
Casual sharing of music (as opposed to outright, high volume piracy) I think is a bigger marketing tool than radio and MTV combined
You could be right here, but we're talking about a business here, and a business can't profit off of this. And this isn't sharing, but "low volume piracy".
The music business is more than just a popularity contest.
AFAIK, royalties are in the low-teens % of the wholesale price (which is like $12.98 or something). Almost all the production expenses and a surprising amount of the promotion expenses for the record come out of the royalties, though, so if the record is not a platinum-seller, the artists get very, very little
Quite true, but this isn't unlike a bank or anyone else who invests a lot of time/money into something. You have to pay back your investors first, then you can enjoy what's left over. The nice part of this for the artist is that he's not left financially obligated should his albums flop.
I doubt the record companies would've ever raised such a fuss if people were *only* using MP3's and burners for their own use. In fact, if you manage to get them to give a straight answer, they'll probably even tell you this kind of behavior is fine.
It's the fact that people don't just use the tools for personal use. They distribute the music themselves, something which is the right of the record label.
Artists could survive without them, but could the companies survive without artists?
Wouldn't survive? Try wouldn't exist. Where would Star Trek have been without a production company? Where would Star Wars be without one? Where would May Payne be without one? Or even Steven King?
So, it seems to me that the music industry is already getting compensated for the sales of CD-R's. And since that's the case, they have nothing to complain about.
Of course they have a lot to complain about! It's their product, they have the right to control how it's distributed. How can the label track the popularity of an album or artist if the albums are never purchased, just pirated?
You're also kidding yourself if you think the amount that they are "compensated" comes close to what is being lost.
And of course, besides the artist+label, there's also the music stores who won't see any of that at all.
No, it's more than 25 cents. However, the record label does stand to make quite a profit on the album. Maybe they're a little greedy, but they've invested a lot of time and money into each of their artists. And sometimes (gasp!) they actually lose money on the artists! Sometimes albums flop, sometimes artists flops.
Most artists wouldn't get to the point that they are at without the so-called "evil" and "greedy" record labels. The artist gets the backing of years of marketing and sales experience which they would not have otherwise.
Sure, if you agree to it. What happens if you don't want to give away your paper? Most artists (ie. Costello) haven't agreed to freely trade their music. They've chosen to sell their music and allow their fans to purchase it.
If you don't want to support the artist's decision to make money off their music, don't buy their album. But respect them and don't steal copies of it either.
''Burning a CD is a good thing,'' he says, ''because you get to see if you like the band, and then you can go to their shows, where you help them by buying tickets and merchandise.
But if you never buy they're CD's in the first place, what makes you think they're going to bother touring? You *are* ripping the artist and their label, etc.
They're not talking about "showing" your friends an example of good music (playing the album or even lending it to them), they're talking about making perfect digital copies and giving them away. It hurts the artist's sales.
If bnetd really did use a portion of Blizzard's code, I don't see why Blizzard wouldn't just point out which routines/lines of code were stolen. I suppose they may be waiting until a trial to do so....
No, you're right, your average consumer doesn't. But I do!
I share a house with several other individuals and the main TV is often being watched by others. In my bedroom I've got my 14" TV and my 19" monitor. Which would you prefer? A $99 PVR would be fantastic, and I'm sure there's plenty of college/university students and others who would like this too.
I don't know about retaining ambiguity...
on
Coding Fair Use
·
· Score: -1, Troll
...but there's a lot of tension regarding "fair use" when my girlfriend is retaining water.
Sure it works, so does my mini-tape recorder and the federal mail, but it's hardly the same thing.
Speak Freely only let's you converse with other people who are using the same software. You can't use your own regular phone, you don't get a real phone number, nor can you call other phone numbers.
Get VoIP Now -- Current Phone line required!!!
on
VoIP for the Masses!
·
· Score: 1
On the application form, a current phone number is required -- sort of odd, isn't it? I guess this is like signing up for cable internet access with your dial-up account.
I'm sure a few people would find the "any area code" useful, but it seems for novel than practical. From the website:
To Select Any Area Code you want*. No matter what area code you choose, your number works from anywhere in the country for as long as your account is active. Imagine being in California and having a 212 area code. With Vonage DigitalVoice you can!
If I'm in California, do I really want to force my friends and family to pay long distance charges just to call me from around the block?
Oh, and this is really going to throw Pizza Hut for a loop next time you place a delivery order:-)
It's been a long time since I've been in a house with only one phone in it. Depending on how your house is wired up I suspect you could just install this in your basement/wiring closet, but then you'd need to run ethernet down there.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps, but it seems to me people are listening to more music today then ever (probably because of all the one-hit wonders downloaded, etc.) -- but music sales are down. This is what leads the record companies to believe that piracy is hurting their sales.
I do agree, though, that the 90's heralded a lot of great bands with the advent of "Alternative Rock" and the likes of Nirvana, Green Day, etc.
Albhy Galuten, vice president of new media for Universal Records: "I find it incredibly ironic that some people will spend an extra $1,000 on their hard drives just so they can store more music, but they won't pay for the music."
Where does this guy buy hard drives? Seems to me that a 40G HD is $150 Canadian. That's enough to store about 10000 songs, or about 1000 albums. That would cost $18000 dollars to buy those albums new, though, so even if you were paying $1000 for your hard drive, I could still see why you were doing it.
Ah, you're making the same mistake I did long ago when working at a computer shop. You see, the term "hard drive" doesn't just mean the storage device, it's the whole unit!!! Motherboard, CPU, Videocard and all!!
I make tapes (and burn CDs) for other people for much the same way I lend out books I like:
You don't seem to be comparing the same thing here -- unless you're photocopying those books for your friends.
Giving away and selling a product you've used is your right (IMO). But to copy that product and give away the copies is someone else's rights that you're not respecting.
Casual sharing of music (as opposed to outright, high volume piracy) I think is a bigger marketing tool than radio and MTV combined
You could be right here, but we're talking about a business here, and a business can't profit off of this. And this isn't sharing, but "low volume piracy".
The music business is more than just a popularity contest.
AFAIK, royalties are in the low-teens % of the wholesale price (which is like $12.98 or something). Almost all the production expenses and a surprising amount of the promotion expenses for the record come out of the royalties, though, so if the record is not a platinum-seller, the artists get very, very little
Quite true, but this isn't unlike a bank or anyone else who invests a lot of time/money into something. You have to pay back your investors first, then you can enjoy what's left over. The nice part of this for the artist is that he's not left financially obligated should his albums flop.
I doubt the record companies would've ever raised such a fuss if people were *only* using MP3's and burners for their own use. In fact, if you manage to get them to give a straight answer, they'll probably even tell you this kind of behavior is fine.
It's the fact that people don't just use the tools for personal use. They distribute the music themselves, something which is the right of the record label.
Artists could survive without them, but could the companies survive without artists?
Wouldn't survive? Try wouldn't exist. Where would Star Trek have been without a production company? Where would Star Wars be without one? Where would May Payne be without one? Or even Steven King?
So, it seems to me that the music industry is already getting compensated for the sales of CD-R's. And since that's the case, they have nothing to complain about.
Of course they have a lot to complain about! It's their product, they have the right to control how it's distributed. How can the label track the popularity of an album or artist if the albums are never purchased, just pirated?
You're also kidding yourself if you think the amount that they are "compensated" comes close to what is being lost.
And of course, besides the artist+label, there's also the music stores who won't see any of that at all.
No, it's more than 25 cents. However, the record label does stand to make quite a profit on the album. Maybe they're a little greedy, but they've invested a lot of time and money into each of their artists. And sometimes (gasp!) they actually lose money on the artists! Sometimes albums flop, sometimes artists flops.
Most artists wouldn't get to the point that they are at without the so-called "evil" and "greedy" record labels. The artist gets the backing of years of marketing and sales experience which they would not have otherwise.
Sure, if you agree to it. What happens if you don't want to give away your paper? Most artists (ie. Costello) haven't agreed to freely trade their music. They've chosen to sell their music and allow their fans to purchase it.
If you don't want to support the artist's decision to make money off their music, don't buy their album. But respect them and don't steal copies of it either.
''Burning a CD is a good thing,'' he says, ''because you get to see if you like the band, and then you can go to their shows, where you help them by buying tickets and merchandise.
But if you never buy they're CD's in the first place, what makes you think they're going to bother touring? You *are* ripping the artist and their label, etc.
They're not talking about "showing" your friends an example of good music (playing the album or even lending it to them), they're talking about making perfect digital copies and giving them away. It hurts the artist's sales.
If bnetd really did use a portion of Blizzard's code, I don't see why Blizzard wouldn't just point out which routines/lines of code were stolen. I suppose they may be waiting until a trial to do so....
And even better:
Windows+Shift+M = Restore all windows (previous state of pressing Win+M).
Also be sure to checkout the FreeBSD Diary [ http://freebsddiary.org/ ] for some great tutorials.
They range from SSL protecting your services [ http://freebsddiary.org/stunnel.php ] to how to restart a service [ http://freebsddiary.org/hup.php ] for the real newbie.
So you're saying an anyonymous review has less credibilty than someone named, say CmdrTaco, or PunchMonkey??? :-)
Too bad, sounds like you get what you pay for. The ATI has had the most positive reviews, and even then some people still find it buggy:
. shtml
http://www.hytekcomputer.com/Reviews/ati/8500dv/1
No, you're right, your average consumer doesn't. But I do!
I share a house with several other individuals and the main TV is often being watched by others. In my bedroom I've got my 14" TV and my 19" monitor. Which would you prefer? A $99 PVR would be fantastic, and I'm sure there's plenty of college/university students and others who would like this too.
...but there's a lot of tension regarding "fair use" when my girlfriend is retaining water.
Big whoop. Program a button to call the ambulance service. Program a button to call the local police. Program a button to call your mom.
:-)
Probably be less hold time; although my knowledge of american 911 calls is limited to what is shown in The Simpsons
Sure it works, so does my mini-tape recorder and the federal mail, but it's hardly the same thing.
Speak Freely only let's you converse with other people who are using the same software. You can't use your own regular phone, you don't get a real phone number, nor can you call other phone numbers.
On the application form, a current phone number is required -- sort of odd, isn't it? I guess this is like signing up for cable internet access with your dial-up account.
I wonder if you could dial by IP :-)
Hey you! Yeah, you! Stop port scanning my machine knob!!!
I'm sure a few people would find the "any area code" useful, but it seems for novel than practical. From the website:
:-)
To Select Any Area Code you want*. No matter what area code you choose, your number works from anywhere in the country for as long as your account is active. Imagine being in California and having a 212 area code. With Vonage DigitalVoice you can!
If I'm in California, do I really want to force my friends and family to pay long distance charges just to call me from around the block?
Oh, and this is really going to throw Pizza Hut for a loop next time you place a delivery order
It's been a long time since I've been in a house with only one phone in it. Depending on how your house is wired up I suspect you could just install this in your basement/wiring closet, but then you'd need to run ethernet down there.
You forgot to mention twice as big and almost twice the price. I'm also going to guess it has a shorter battery life.
:)
Although the builtin wireless is pretty slick