I've got a friend who can mold carbon fiber, I wouldn't mind taking a crack at building one or even a lesser version. How cool would it be to have one of these?
Whoa. You're gonna hack together a submarine?
No offense but Graham Hawkes has been involved in building a large percentage of the world submarine fleet, and even he described building this as a challenge. Submarines are actually quite simple devices that, even if they are only going down two atmospheres (66 feet) have to be built to insanely tight tolerances with NASA-level attention to detail or there could be.... problems. In addition, they don't describe the very expensive support necessary for use of any submersible in the ocean.
Some of the possible pitfalls of throwing together a submersible can be seen here if you really insist on trying to cobble together yer very own Red October.
But I have to agree with you...that looks a whole lot more fun than a Segway to me. B)
I won't even get into this swamp of comparing costs, but what no one has pointed out is that while there are situations where you can record great tracks in your basement using digital gear, it's not universally true for all musical styles
Take classical music. You need a BIG ass room like Olympic 1 in London, or at least a decent size room like Electric Lady A. That costs a lotta money.
Many artists want to use a lot ot live, real musicians, and sometimes they require more than a tiny room filled with geekware to give a great performance.
For proper strings, you need a nice space, ditto live drums. Same with live piano. Again for horns. Backing vocals sound great in a big room. And there is world of difference between lead vocals done in a bathroom versus those done in a solid isolation booth with a great mike.
While we're on mikes, there is going to be a huge difference between some cheap ass stage mic and a Neumann U47 from the 40's which are VERY expensive.
Then let's discuss mixing. Mix it yourself in your basement? Cool. But if you want it to sound amazing, get Bob Clearmountain or Andy Wallace to remix it at 5 grand a day.
So, can you get a record out the door cheap? Yeah sure you can. Can you get a album that is as flawlessly made as a Seal CD? Not a chance. Even Nirvana had Andy Wallace mix their stuff.
The very thought makes me shudder and think of Gregory Peck.
Publisher: Simon & Schuster; 1st ed (April 20
on
F'd Companies
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Um, why is Slashdot reviewing a book that came out in April 2002?
In 2001 FC was a funny read, considering most of us either worked for, or knew people who worked for some of the firms in the book.
Haven't been many flameouts of hugely funded wesellfuckall.com companies lately, so FC has turned into a rather nasty insult site, short on content. The book is nowhere near as fun to read as the site anyway.
Ok, we know that a significant percentage of MP3s online did not come from a ripped CD that someone purchased, but rather, from an advance copy, studio DAT, recording studio leak, label leak, manufacturing leak or other non-consumer source. That's no surprise to anyone, and nicely illustrated by unmastered advances (3 months early) of the last Korn and Pearl Jam CDs.
So, exactly how is this expensive MS technology going to affect that content stream? It won't. All it will do is complicate matters for people who actually are honest and purchase the CD.
Also, as someone else mentioned, if the playback device has 2 RCA jacks or a pair of cannon connectors, anyone can get a great copy via analog. Hey, there are already "Analog Rip" options in many major media applications, so what's the point here?
Rule 1: the audio degradation caused by analog copying is LESS than that caused by MP3 compression. So...I don't care what fancy DRM they bring out, if you can hear it, you can copy and distribute it.
You'd think so, but you're also the guys also put out Lilo and Stitch, built Blizzard Beach, run Sunrise Safari at AK and the backstage stuff at Living Seas, which more than makes up for doing endless Lion King sequels for twelve years. Y'all still get my $7k a year for our yearly two week Haj to the Mouse (DAKL) and I'm already booked for next December. B)
I find WDW amazing in that some guy from Bumfuck, Mississippi can stay in a tent for $20 a night at Fort Wilderness and have just as good a time on the same attractions as the poser in the Presidential suite at AKL. Anyone ever do an analysis of why WDW appeals to Southern religious conservatives and New York liberals; college geeks and uneducated dullards; 90 year olds and virtually every kid on the planet?
Probably the reason I keep going back is to find out the answer to that question.
I just came back from a trip to Disneyworld and they have 32 Segways for what seemed like managerial staff and patrolling the parking lots. Even considering how stair-free WDW is, and what large distances might need to be crossed, when I saw the first Segway in the Epcot plaza, first I thought "this is the best tech they can show off? Pffft."
Then I thought, "hmm, big distances to cover, maybe not the worst idea I ever heard."
Then I saw the huge Segway display at Innoventions and realized it was just more smart marketing by Dean Kamen. The yokels were all saying "gaaaahlee where's the gas tank?" and similar comments, then getting lessons in gyroscopic stabilization and Michelin tire alchemy from the well-rehearsed cast members. Hey, if they can get high visibility at Epcot, that's better than/.,right? B)
I've tried one...yeah they are neat, but at 80 pounds, just too heavy to lug ino my car trunk or public transport and when compared for value with a $150 electric Razor, it loses. But as someone said above..bring em down to $500 and I'll consider it.
Oh, BTW, I lost all respect when I saw them selling whirling Buzz Lightyear lights, glow sticks and flashlight ight-sabers off the Segways at Epcot at night. Gah.
Well one item they developed was the nuclear reactor, and when Feynman was aked what could be done with it, he proposed a number of ideas including the fact that it could be used to power a submarine (he was just thinking of stuff off the top of his head). From that point on he got either a letter (or a letter with royalties, can't quite remember) that stated he was the owner of the 'nuclear submarine' patent. Sounds pretty much like what you described up there doesn't it?
Not really, though it's an interesting example. Feynman had already developed the tech, designed and built the reactor (or at least a POC/prototype) and was simply tossing out possible applications.
However, in the French model, one can come up with something that modern technology simply will not support, but is likely to do so in the future, such as stem cell based limb regeneration or interstellar propulsion.
Shouldn't the "artist"/royalty recipient be at least able to understand and describe the necessary technology of the invention for which he is being rewarded?
Don't know in brain fucked US IP system, but in France, at least a few year ago, literal description by artist of imaginary things where enough to render the things unpatentable, when somebody finally was able to make them. The one who could have patented them was the artist. (there is no need to prove actual realisation to obtain the patent).
So, if I'm reading this right, I could describe, and therefore prevent the patenting (and therefore, any incentive to actully build the invention due to probable lack of ROI) of, say:
Interstellar Propulsion
Biological Computers (and inevitable Beowulf Clusters of same)
Jetson's-type cars that levitate and fold into a neat, easily liftable briefcase
Organic Windows that kill off dirty cells and replace them with clear, clean ones
Body-implantable global communication devices
Frozen pizza that tastes like Ray's, not cardboard and sewage.
etc, etc...
Is it really possible that this is how the French view the protection of Intellectual Property? If you can think it up, no matter if it defies the currently understood laws of physics, you can claim ownership of it?
All kidding aside, if this is the real system, wouldn't it serve as an anchor on development? After all, why invent Teleportation if some unemployed briebrain smoking a Galoises can prevent you from profiting from your invention?
I find it hard to believe that this is the actual French law.
.. that back in the days (50s and 60s), when a lot of pressing plants used the Mafia to deter organised labour, there used to be a grey market kick back to the Mafia in the form of pressed CDs that weren't registered on the books of the record companies.
Um, while James Russell (I think) did actually come up with the concept for what would become the CD in 1965, Sony and Philips didn't popularize the format till 1983. So, no CDs were kicked back in the 50's - 60's.
Also remember that even today, record contracts include at least a 10% "breakage" or "container: allowance off the worldwide gross prior to calculating how many rolls of pennies the artist will get, after recouping all expenses. What they do with that 10% (since CDs don't break in shipment like the shellac records for which the breakage allowance was instituted) is a mystery. Some labels actually skim 25% off the top. No need for CD kickbacks there.
Yep, 25%. You want to see just how egregious some record contracts are? The following is clipped from an actual label contract presented to the prospective band last week. All identifying brands and names have been removed:
ROYALTIES
Company shall accrue to Artist the following royalties for the sale by Company, its licensees or assigns, or long playing Albums derived from the Master Recordings against which all sums paid to Artist herein shall be recouped.
(a) With respect to records sold up at Company's or its distributor's "top line" price level in the United States, a royalty at the rate of ten percent (10%) computed on the (SRLP) list price less a 25% container deduction.
(b) With respect to each particular type of record sold in Canada and Japan (including records exported to third parties in Canada and for which Company is paid by such third parties), royalties shall accrue at Eighty Five percent (85%) the rate applicable under subparagraph 6(a).
(c) With respect to each particular type of record sold in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the European Economic Community (including records exported to third parties for such territories and for which Company is paid by such third parties), royalties shall accrue at Sixty Five percent (65%) the rate applicable under subparagraph 6(a).
(d) With respect to each particular type of record sold for any territory throughout world not specifically mentioned in subparagraph 6(a), 6(b) and 6(c) (including records exported to third parties in such territories and for which Company is paid by such third parties), royalties shall accrue at Fifty percent (50%) the rate applicable under subparagraph 6(a).
(e) With respect to records sold at Company's or its distributor's "mid line" price level through normal trade channels, royalties shall be at Seventy Five percent (75%) the rate set forth in subparagraph 6(a).
(f) With respect to records sold at Company's or its distributor's "budget line" price level through normal trade channels, royalties shall be at Fifty percent (50%) the rate set forth in subparagraph 6(a).
(g) Sales of any Singles, Extended Play Singles and recordings in the United States which are not long playing Albums shall be paid at the rate of Ten percent (10%) computed on the (SRLP) list price less container deductions and any taxes. Sales outside the United States shall be proportionally reduced according to the formula specified in 6(b), (c) and (d) above.
(h) With respect to the licensing of the Master Recordings to third parties, including but not limited to usage such as record clubs, compilation records and synchronization usage, royalties shall be at the rate of Fifty percent (50%) of the net amount of any such fees received by Company, its licensees or assigns.
(i) No royalties whatsoever shall be payable to Artist hereunder with respect to records (i) distributed to any person or entity primarily for purposes of promotion, (ii) sold as "scrap", "overstock" or "surplus", (iii) distributed as "free goods" (limited to no more than 20% or "bonus" records).
(I'm surprised there isn't a clause about shaking the artist by the ankles on a monthly basis to get his loose change.)
Beyond that, the more common kickback to organized crime in the music business in the 50's - 60's was cash applied to payola to help the "investments" of organized crime climb the charts.
The Grateful Dead started legal concert taping years ago, eventually setting aside stageside sections for tapers where they could set up mic booms and their DAT recorders. These concerts (plus those of Phish, Allman Bros, Dead satellite groups, etc) for the past five-six years have been available on Etree which is essentially a clearinghouse for FTPs with.shn versions of these shows. Been downloading them for years. From the site: "You can find nearly every band that allows taping in the jambands community on etree.org, including Phish, The Grateful Dead, The Seth Yacovone Band, String Cheese Incident, The Slip, Medeski, Martin & Wood, Umphrey's McGee, The Big Wu, Amfibian and The New Deal."
I would venture to say that these same Phish shows will be available on Etree sites, so why does livephish think people will pay for what they A) can get free already from Etree or B) will almost certainly end up on Etree anyway?
Besides, doesn't charging for taped concerts kind of go against the concert-tapes-as-promotion philosophy? The reason the Dead were the most successful concert band of all time was partially due to the free availability of tons of concert tapes. I know livephish has to pay for bandwidth, but this is a much larger divergence from the Dead/Phish philosophy of free concert music than people seem to believe.
A robot may not injure humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
Which of course alters First law: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, except where that would conflict with the Zeroth Law.
As a real Asimov fan (I even named my daughter Bliss after the character in Foundation's Edge and Foundation and Earth) I'm still surprised no one has taken the Foundation series and brought it to the screen. It seems such a natural movie script, with at least four or five great movies to pull out of the series.
Anyone know why it has never been proposed as a project by Hollywood?
Because, other than geeks....people do not consume media in an unfamiliar paradigm. They want tunes in their car, their portable device or their stereo.
They want movies on their TV. Qcast allows both of these. I have a Cinema Display and I won't even watch a movie on that. Rather than lying on my couch looking at a 61" Toshiba? No contest.
As for "blowing up your PS2" using Qcast puts far less strain on the graphics chips in the PS2 than GTA: it merely becomes an interface device. IMO, Qcast (and Roomlink, eventually) are the PS2's killer apps.
Yep, been using it for months and it's great. I've posted about it at least seven times and I tried submitting stories about Qcast twice: once in early September, once a month later, but they were rejected.
I have only two even slightly negative comments about Qcast: it won't play any movie in a nonstandard resolution (they are working on it) and since there are no VCR-like controls (FF/RW/Scan) you have to be REAL careful with the controller. My wife and I were watching a movie Saturday and my little girl came in and tripped over the controller. Bam! Back to the beginning, and no way to advance to the point where you were watching. That's my only real complaint, and a simple "are you sure?" dialog would fix that.
Other than that, it absolutely works as advertised. I have it installed on 2 PS2s, one at the TV and one at the stereo (both looking at the same machine in my office.) Streams pretty much anything you throw at it, cleanly, glitch-free and with an easy to use UI.
What a load of bullshit, DiVX;-) is BETTER quality than DVD.
Hm, well that's just saying MPEG2 is inferior to MPEG4 which most knowlegeable people might not agree with. Subjective, not into arguing that. I have seen some development implementations of MPEG4 that are amazing, and might be better than MPEG2 (subjectively) but none in current use AFAIK.
But leaving that aside, exactly when have you seen a DIVX that didn't go through MPEG2 compression first? Only example I know are the amazing HDDM (High Def Digital Masters) that you can get on IRC, but I wouldn't say they are markedly better than a DVD...about the same to my eyes.
Your experience of Divx is probably one of these: a SCR (Divx compression of a TV cap or VHS), DVDSCR (been through MPEG2 already), TS/TC (not even in the same league) or a DVD Rip (again, already been MPEG2 compressed.) Where have you had the opportunity to compare a Divx encode and an MPEG2 encode of the same asset?
If you have a $150,000 Digibeta machine and are referring to Digibeta cammed stuff, then maybe you have an argument. But the only Divx I ever saw that was slightly better than the equivalent DVD was the HDDM of Vertical Limit.
5. Selection. If the average consumer were to turn to the Internet to rent movies, they would have to be able to compete by providing a selection of movies that would rival the catalog of a mail order rental service or even a well stocked Blockbuster. (15,000 - 30,000 titles would be a good start).
Uh, that's a little excessive, and 30k films probably exceeds the film catalog of all the studios combined. Even Netflix , that wonderful resource of current and classic films that DVD rippers worldwide love so dearly only has 12,000 titles.
I'd like to see more selection as well, but asking for every film ever made two weeks after the service launches is a bit much,
Yes Movielink has issues, (some major) to work out. But as geeks,/. people are far more technically savvy, have bigger pipes and can tell the difference between a 750kbps SBR encode and a true VBR encode. I would take a wild guess and say that of the moviegoing public, people with that level of technical sophistication are less than 5% of the public.
We're all the equivalent of Mac users, and when people snap back "Macs are only 5% of the userbase, who the hell cares about them?" you might think of/. users geting the same treatment from Hollywood and the media business. Hollywood wants MASS marketing of films over IP, and Movielink is the very first tentative step in that strategy. It's a test essentially. And personally, I think they did a HELL of a job.
Think for a moment how hard it is to build a service like Movielink. Many posters have discussed the technical aspects. Divx or MS/Real? Well, most PCs can play the latter, only geeks play the former at the moment. Jeez, Divx wasn't even legal till they got rid of 3.x code.
What about bitrate? The developers had to balance quality vs download time. Yeah, I have a huge pipe, so gimme a 1.5gb DVDIVX or SVCD, I have no problem waiting. My Movielink download took 15 minutes. But many don't have the bandwidth many/.'ers take for granted: "broadband" is a relative thing. So the Movielink encoders did the best they could under the constraints they had. I'm sure that if they had encoded into Divx WS VBR, there would be just as many whining "but the movies are too big and take too long to download, this sucks!"
I won't even get into the DRM swamp. Yeah, all DRM can be hacked, no shit. But the question is, how do you make a relatively painless, somewhat protected experience that won't encourage mass copying and trading by people who can't hack a video driver or run screen capure video software to a gigantic drive?
Then add another few dozen issues: delivery architecture, bandwidth costs...how about windowing? Know what that is?
Movies are released in 'windows:' the first being Theatrical. Forget about seeing VOD in the Theatrical window anytime soon. Too many political issues to deal with, and besides, no one wants to fuck with box office revenue.
Lots of other windows, Airline, PPV, Home Video (Movielink's window), HBO (when no other entity other than HBO can show the film), Broadcast.
So, if you were planning Movielink, how do you offer content that is in a window that appeals to most people, but doesn't piss off your business partners ? (HBO, MSO's, Wal-Mart, etc...) Not so simple.
And remember, Movielink is not a single entity, but a joint venture of five Hollywood studios. Do you have any concept of what it must be like to get five studios to agree on anything? Remember, every movie encode has to be approved by the studio, plus the director, producer and talent. A fucking nightmare scenario. Add that to five sets of movie execs, each who want to put their own stamp on the business, and increase their own revenue.
Now, build a technology that all five sets of movie execs approve, that all five sets of movie execs agree will generate revenue, that all five are willing to commit their most precious resource: their intellectual property.
Now, make it so that the geeks on/. think it's perfect, awesome in encoding quality, UI and experience. Not so easy huh?
Anyone remember what AOL looked like as they changed from Quantum Link (C64/128 only) to a mass market business? It sucked. Remember the first weeks of Amazon and all those 404s? Every business has growing pains and Movielink will have more than most.
Yep, they arrange with both brick and mortar retailers (B&N, Tower, HMV, Sam Goody) and digital retailers (Amazon, CDNow) globally to put your music in their bins. Now, how good your placement is, how much in store advertising you are given is based on how much your label likes you, and how many CDs you'll probably sell. Moby? Front and center. End caps. Posters. A "rub Moby's bald head for luck" cardboard cutout at the door.
Fluffy and the Puffboys? 2 CDs in the "F" bin.
* they distribute your shit
Well, they sign with distributors, but ok, they manage your distribution.
* they promote your shit
True, but again, the amount and energy of that promotion will be very different for Linkin Park than for up-and-coming punk band Pus Casserole.
* they book your shit
Touring? Don't you have a booking agent? A sponsor? You might think about that.
* they speak "on your behalf" in these kinda situations
Again true, but the RIAA is much more of the "industry voice." And yeah, label attorneys are typically pretty good.
I mean, don't get me wrong. Even with all these advantages there are significant disadvantages:
* you must sell or you are dropped * you get a fraction of what you'd make on an indie * you often end up owing the label money * occasional legal nightmares
These are minor to you? As I said, I spent fifteen years in the business, and I know of a few multi-platinum artists that either never recouped, or have such gargatuan legal bills that any profit is long gone.
Here's another one for you to ponder (and reply to if ya like.) Whose count do you accept when royalty time comes along? Every six months I get at least twenty phonebook sized royalty statements, telling me how many copies of a particular album sold in Burkina Faso, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago, South Africa, Israel, Anguilla, yada yada. I get an equvalent sized package from my publisher, with similarly arcane Excel effluvia. I think I read one once. Reversed, they make wonderful scratch printer paper, but otherwise, they mean little to me (except for the attached check which is always disappointingly low.)
I wouldn't even know where to go to get an independent auditor but I know of a few bands that did, and let's say...their figures differed from the publisher and label. A lot.
Basically, the labels/publishers tell you how many sold, and the band usually has to take that word as gospel. You comfortable with that?
In short, while there are big issues, I think labels DEFINITELY have a function. MP3.com proved that mass Internet distribution is a joke. The labels may have an 85% failure rate, but they are damn good marketers, and Kazaa would be much less popular without BMG music.
What films do people request on IRC film channels? The ones all over TV and print advertising. What CDs are most anticipated by the unwashed masses? The one's most heavily marketed. They watch the QT trailer for Nemesis with drooling glee. They hear a new Korn CD is forthcoming on radio and TV. And what do they say?
"Hey I gotta download that when it comes out."
Labels and film studios are neither anachronisms or useless. They still serve an essential function, and you're right - no signed artist would think that their label is merely a manufacturer.
Things have to change, but labels aren't going anywhere.
I have a modded (Apple) and an unmodded PS2. The copy works fine in the modded PS2 but not in the unmodded one. For that, you'll have to use the master disk provided with the software.
I'm probably being overcautious: if you don't chuck the thing around, I'm sure it'll be fine.
Smart move - I had to buy both my net adapters on ebay for $55 each. None anywhere around here.
And unfortunately, it only supports he Sony Net Adapter: I tried numerous USB to Ether adaptors and none would work. But I can tell you it works on both modded (Apple) and unmodded PS2s.
Since the PS2 Qcast disk must be in the PS2 when using Qcast, I got worried about someone taking it out, chucking it on the floor and scratching or losing it. Clone CD gave me a perfect copy and I can keep the original safely in the case. Just a suggestion.
Spiderman may have cost $139M to make, but I'm sure Sony spent a lot on advertising and other promotion as well.
Yep, probably almost as much as it cost to make the film, which is why they need to gross double to break even.
And Sony doesn't get every penny of the box office either, much of it surely goes to the individual theaters.
Where did I imply that Sony Pictures takes 100% of box office? But you're inaccurate anyway: "much" of box office revenue doesn't go to theaters, at least not for the first, juicy weeks of a films' release. During the film's opening week, the studios typically takes up to 80 percent of gross box office. By the fifth or sixth week, the percentage the studio takes will perhaps shrink to about 35-40 percent, but unless you have a Titanic or Fat Greek Wedding, by that time, the film has moved on.
Without concession stands many theaters would have to close.
The rest of your calculations are similarly bogus. You clearly have no understanding of how the entertainment business works so quit pretending.
Because you have not proven the following assertion to the satisfaction of most Slashdot readers:
Well, a previous poster referred to the Sony Music financials, where they lost $46mm on revenue of $1.x billion. If they are sharing revenue with Sony Electronics, then they are doing so under the table, as Sony Electronics is quite profitable. And if they are doing that, you're absolutely right: I can't prove it.
But as far as legal revenue sharing, the SME Y2001 financials don't show any revenue from electronics.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got a friend who can mold carbon fiber, I wouldn't mind taking a crack at building one or even a lesser version. How cool would it be to have
one of these?
Whoa. You're gonna hack together a submarine?
No offense but Graham Hawkes has been involved in building a large percentage of the world submarine fleet, and even he described building this as a challenge. Submarines are actually quite simple devices that, even if they are only going down two atmospheres (66 feet) have to be built to insanely tight tolerances with NASA-level attention to detail or there could be.... problems. In addition, they don't describe the very expensive support necessary for use of any submersible in the ocean.
Some of the possible pitfalls of throwing together a submersible can be seen here if you really insist on trying to cobble together yer very own Red October.
But I have to agree with you...that looks a whole lot more fun than a Segway to me. B)
I won't even get into this swamp of comparing costs, but what no one has pointed out is that while there are situations where you can record great tracks in your basement using digital gear, it's not universally true for all musical styles
Take classical music. You need a BIG ass room like Olympic 1 in London, or at least a decent size room like Electric Lady A. That costs a lotta money.
Many artists want to use a lot ot live, real musicians, and sometimes they require more than a tiny room filled with geekware to give a great performance.
For proper strings, you need a nice space, ditto live drums. Same with live piano. Again for horns. Backing vocals sound great in a big room. And there is world of difference between lead vocals done in a bathroom versus those done in a solid isolation booth with a great mike.
While we're on mikes, there is going to be a huge difference between some cheap ass stage mic and a Neumann U47 from the 40's which are VERY expensive.
Then let's discuss mixing. Mix it yourself in your basement? Cool. But if you want it to sound amazing, get Bob Clearmountain or Andy Wallace to remix it at 5 grand a day.
So, can you get a record out the door cheap? Yeah sure you can. Can you get a album that is as flawlessly made as a Seal CD? Not a chance. Even Nirvana had Andy Wallace mix their stuff.
Speed costs money: how fast do you wanna go?
Rosen is a lesbian, how the hell did she manage to come up with a kid?
Been living under a rock?
Easy!
The very thought makes me shudder and think of Gregory Peck.
Um, why is Slashdot reviewing a book that came out in April 2002?
In 2001 FC was a funny read, considering most of us either worked for, or knew people who worked for some of the firms in the book.
Haven't been many flameouts of hugely funded wesellfuckall.com companies lately, so FC has turned into a rather nasty insult site, short on content. The book is nowhere near as fun to read as the site anyway.
So, why a review of a ten month old book?
Ok, we know that a significant percentage of MP3s online did not come from a ripped CD that someone purchased, but rather, from an advance copy, studio DAT, recording studio leak, label leak, manufacturing leak or other non-consumer source. That's no surprise to anyone, and nicely illustrated by unmastered advances (3 months early) of the last Korn and Pearl Jam CDs.
So, exactly how is this expensive MS technology going to affect that content stream? It won't. All it will do is complicate matters for people who actually are honest and purchase the CD.
Also, as someone else mentioned, if the playback device has 2 RCA jacks or a pair of cannon connectors, anyone can get a great copy via analog. Hey, there are already "Analog Rip" options in many major media applications, so what's the point here?
Rule 1: the audio degradation caused by analog copying is LESS than that caused by MP3 compression. So...I don't care what fancy DRM they bring out, if you can hear it, you can copy and distribute it.
You mean like this?
You'd think so, but you're also the guys also put out Lilo and Stitch, built Blizzard Beach, run Sunrise Safari at AK and the backstage stuff at Living Seas, which more than makes up for doing endless Lion King sequels for twelve years. Y'all still get my $7k a year for our yearly two week Haj to the Mouse (DAKL) and I'm already booked for next December. B)
I find WDW amazing in that some guy from Bumfuck, Mississippi can stay in a tent for $20 a night at Fort Wilderness and have just as good a time on the same attractions as the poser in the Presidential suite at AKL. Anyone ever do an analysis of why WDW appeals to Southern religious conservatives and New York liberals; college geeks and uneducated dullards; 90 year olds and virtually every kid on the planet?
Probably the reason I keep going back is to find out the answer to that question.
I just came back from a trip to Disneyworld and they have 32 Segways for what seemed like managerial staff and patrolling the parking lots. Even considering how stair-free WDW is, and what large distances might need to be crossed, when I saw the first Segway in the Epcot plaza, first I thought "this is the best tech they can show off? Pffft."
/.,right? B)
Then I thought, "hmm, big distances to cover, maybe not the worst idea I ever heard."
Then I saw the huge Segway display at Innoventions and realized it was just more smart marketing by Dean Kamen. The yokels were all saying "gaaaahlee where's the gas tank?" and similar comments, then getting lessons in gyroscopic stabilization and Michelin tire alchemy from the well-rehearsed cast members. Hey, if they can get high visibility at Epcot, that's better than
I've tried one...yeah they are neat, but at 80 pounds, just too heavy to lug ino my car trunk or public transport and when compared for value with a $150 electric Razor, it loses. But as someone said above..bring em down to $500 and I'll consider it.
Oh, BTW, I lost all respect when I saw them selling whirling Buzz Lightyear lights, glow sticks and flashlight ight-sabers off the Segways at Epcot at night. Gah.
Well one item they developed was the nuclear reactor, and when Feynman was aked what could be done with it, he proposed a number of ideas including the fact that it could be used to power a submarine (he was just thinking of stuff off the top of his head). From that point on he got either a letter (or a letter with royalties, can't quite remember) that stated he was the owner of the 'nuclear submarine' patent. Sounds pretty much like what you described up there doesn't it?
/royalty recipient be at least able to understand and describe the necessary technology of the invention for which he is being rewarded?
Not really, though it's an interesting example. Feynman had already developed the tech, designed and built the reactor (or at least a POC/prototype) and was simply tossing out possible applications.
However, in the French model, one can come up with something that modern technology simply will not support, but is likely to do so in the future, such as stem cell based limb regeneration or interstellar propulsion.
Shouldn't the "artist"
Don't know in brain fucked US IP system, but in France, at least a few year ago, literal description by artist of imaginary things where enough to render the things unpatentable, when somebody finally was able to make them. The one who could have patented them was the artist. (there is no need to prove actual realisation to obtain the patent).
So, if I'm reading this right, I could describe, and therefore prevent the patenting (and therefore, any incentive to actully build the invention due to probable lack of ROI) of, say:
Interstellar Propulsion
Biological Computers (and inevitable Beowulf Clusters of same)
Teleportation
Brain Transplantation
Additional Digit Transplantation (high seven dude!)
Jetson's-type cars that levitate and fold into a neat, easily liftable briefcase
Organic Windows that kill off dirty cells and replace them with clear, clean ones
Body-implantable global communication devices
Frozen pizza that tastes like Ray's, not cardboard and sewage.
etc, etc...
Is it really possible that this is how the French view the protection of Intellectual Property? If you can think it up, no matter if it defies the currently understood laws of physics, you can claim ownership of it?
All kidding aside, if this is the real system, wouldn't it serve as an anchor on development? After all, why invent Teleportation if some unemployed briebrain smoking a Galoises can prevent you from profiting from your invention?
I find it hard to believe that this is the actual French law.
Um, while James Russell (I think) did actually come up with the concept for what would become the CD in 1965, Sony and Philips didn't popularize the format till 1983. So, no CDs were kicked back in the 50's - 60's.
Also remember that even today, record contracts include at least a 10% "breakage" or "container: allowance off the worldwide gross prior to calculating how many rolls of pennies the artist will get, after recouping all expenses. What they do with that 10% (since CDs don't break in shipment like the shellac records for which the breakage allowance was instituted) is a mystery. Some labels actually skim 25% off the top. No need for CD kickbacks there.
Yep, 25%. You want to see just how egregious some record contracts are? The following is clipped from an actual label contract presented to the prospective band last week. All identifying brands and names have been removed:
ROYALTIES
Company shall accrue to Artist the following royalties for the sale by Company, its licensees or assigns, or long playing Albums derived from the Master Recordings against which all sums paid to Artist herein shall be recouped.
(a) With respect to records sold up at Company's or its distributor's "top line" price level in the United States, a royalty at the rate of ten percent (10%) computed on the (SRLP) list price less a 25% container deduction.
(b) With respect to each particular type of record sold in Canada and Japan (including records exported to third parties in Canada and for which Company is paid by such third parties), royalties shall accrue at Eighty Five percent (85%) the rate applicable under subparagraph 6(a).
(c) With respect to each particular type of record sold in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the European Economic Community (including records exported to third parties for such territories and for which Company is paid by such third parties), royalties shall accrue at Sixty Five percent (65%) the rate applicable under subparagraph 6(a).
(d) With respect to each particular type of record sold for any territory throughout world not specifically mentioned in subparagraph 6(a), 6(b) and 6(c) (including records exported to third parties in such territories and for which Company is paid by such third parties), royalties shall accrue at Fifty percent (50%) the rate applicable under subparagraph 6(a).
(e) With respect to records sold at Company's or its distributor's "mid line" price level through normal trade channels, royalties shall be at Seventy Five percent (75%) the rate set forth in subparagraph 6(a).
(f) With respect to records sold at Company's or its distributor's "budget line" price level through normal trade channels, royalties shall be at Fifty percent (50%) the rate set forth in subparagraph 6(a).
(g) Sales of any Singles, Extended Play Singles and recordings in the United States which are not long playing Albums shall be paid at the rate of Ten percent (10%) computed on the (SRLP) list price less container deductions and any taxes. Sales outside the United States shall be proportionally reduced according to the formula specified in 6(b), (c) and (d) above.
(h) With respect to the licensing of the Master Recordings to third parties, including but not limited to usage such as record clubs, compilation records and synchronization usage, royalties shall be at the rate of Fifty percent (50%) of the net amount of any such fees received by Company, its licensees or assigns.
(i) No royalties whatsoever shall be payable to Artist hereunder with respect to records (i) distributed to any person or entity primarily for purposes of promotion, (ii) sold as "scrap", "overstock" or "surplus", (iii) distributed as "free goods" (limited to no more than 20% or "bonus" records).
(I'm surprised there isn't a clause about shaking the artist by the ankles on a monthly basis to get his loose change.)
Beyond that, the more common kickback to organized crime in the music business in the 50's - 60's was cash applied to payola to help the "investments" of organized crime climb the charts.
The Grateful Dead started legal concert taping years ago, eventually setting aside stageside sections for tapers where they could set up mic booms and their DAT recorders. These concerts (plus those of Phish, Allman Bros, Dead satellite groups, etc) for the past five-six years have been available on Etree which is essentially a clearinghouse for FTPs with .shn versions of these shows. Been downloading them for years. From the site: "You can find nearly every band that allows taping in the jambands community on etree.org, including Phish, The Grateful Dead, The Seth Yacovone Band, String Cheese Incident, The Slip, Medeski, Martin & Wood, Umphrey's McGee, The Big Wu, Amfibian and The New Deal."
I would venture to say that these same Phish shows will be available on Etree sites, so why does livephish think people will pay for what they A) can get free already from Etree or B) will almost certainly end up on Etree anyway?
Besides, doesn't charging for taped concerts kind of go against the concert-tapes-as-promotion philosophy? The reason the Dead were the most successful concert band of all time was partially due to the free availability of tons of concert tapes. I know livephish has to pay for bandwidth, but this is a much larger divergence from the Dead/Phish philosophy of free concert music than people seem to believe.
Doh, your forgot Zeroth Law dude.
A robot may not injure humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
Which of course alters First law: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, except where that would conflict with the Zeroth Law.
As a real Asimov fan (I even named my daughter Bliss after the character in Foundation's Edge and Foundation and Earth) I'm still surprised no one has taken the Foundation series and brought it to the screen. It seems such a natural movie script, with at least four or five great movies to pull out of the series.
Anyone know why it has never been proposed as a project by Hollywood?
Because, other than geeks....people do not consume media in an unfamiliar paradigm. They want tunes in their car, their portable device or their stereo.
They want movies on their TV. Qcast allows both of these. I have a Cinema Display and I won't even watch a movie on that. Rather than lying on my couch looking at a 61" Toshiba? No contest.
As for "blowing up your PS2" using Qcast puts far less strain on the graphics chips in the PS2 than GTA: it merely becomes an interface device. IMO, Qcast (and Roomlink, eventually) are the PS2's killer apps.
Yep, been using it for months and it's great. I've posted about it at least seven times and I tried submitting stories about Qcast twice: once in early September, once a month later, but they were rejected.
I have only two even slightly negative comments about Qcast: it won't play any movie in a nonstandard resolution (they are working on it) and since there are no VCR-like controls (FF/RW/Scan) you have to be REAL careful with the controller. My wife and I were watching a movie Saturday and my little girl came in and tripped over the controller. Bam! Back to the beginning, and no way to advance to the point where you were watching. That's my only real complaint, and a simple "are you sure?" dialog would fix that.
Other than that, it absolutely works as advertised. I have it installed on 2 PS2s, one at the TV and one at the stereo (both looking at the same machine in my office.) Streams pretty much anything you throw at it, cleanly, glitch-free and with an easy to use UI.
Buy it, it's well worth the cash.
..Hollywood is sickeningly corrupt and gluteonously wealthy ...
I don't quite understand what Hollywood's large rear ends have to do with copyright law, but I agree with you. I guess.
B)
What a load of bullshit, DiVX ;-) is BETTER quality than DVD.
Hm, well that's just saying MPEG2 is inferior to MPEG4 which most knowlegeable people might not agree with. Subjective, not into arguing that. I have seen some development implementations of MPEG4 that are amazing, and might be better than MPEG2 (subjectively) but none in current use AFAIK.
But leaving that aside, exactly when have you seen a DIVX that didn't go through MPEG2 compression first? Only example I know are the amazing HDDM (High Def Digital Masters) that you can get on IRC, but I wouldn't say they are markedly better than a DVD...about the same to my eyes.
Your experience of Divx is probably one of these: a SCR (Divx compression of a TV cap or VHS), DVDSCR (been through MPEG2 already), TS/TC (not even in the same league) or a DVD Rip (again, already been MPEG2 compressed.) Where have you had the opportunity to compare a Divx encode and an MPEG2 encode of the same asset?
If you have a $150,000 Digibeta machine and are referring to Digibeta cammed stuff, then maybe you have an argument. But the only Divx I ever saw that was slightly better than the equivalent DVD was the HDDM of Vertical Limit.
5. Selection. If the average consumer were to turn to the Internet to rent movies, they would have to be able to compete by providing a selection of movies that would rival the catalog of a mail order rental service or even a well stocked Blockbuster. (15,000 - 30,000 titles would be a good start).
Uh, that's a little excessive, and 30k films probably exceeds the film catalog of all the studios combined. Even Netflix , that wonderful resource of current and classic films that DVD rippers worldwide love so dearly only has 12,000 titles.
I'd like to see more selection as well, but asking for every film ever made two weeks after the service launches is a bit much,
Yes Movielink has issues, (some major) to work out. But as geeks, /. people are far more technically savvy, have bigger pipes and can tell the difference between a 750kbps SBR encode and a true VBR encode. I would take a wild guess and say that of the moviegoing public, people with that level of technical sophistication are less than 5% of the public.
/. users geting the same treatment from Hollywood and the media business. Hollywood wants MASS marketing of films over IP, and Movielink is the very first tentative step in that strategy. It's a test essentially. And personally, I think they did a HELL of a job.
/.'ers take for granted: "broadband" is a relative thing. So the Movielink encoders did the best they could under the constraints they had. I'm sure that if they had encoded into Divx WS VBR, there would be just as many whining "but the movies are too big and take too long to download, this sucks!"
/. think it's perfect, awesome in encoding quality, UI and experience. Not so easy huh?
We're all the equivalent of Mac users, and when people snap back "Macs are only 5% of the userbase, who the hell cares about them?" you might think of
Think for a moment how hard it is to build a service like Movielink. Many posters have discussed the technical aspects. Divx or MS/Real? Well, most PCs can play the latter, only geeks play the former at the moment. Jeez, Divx wasn't even legal till they got rid of 3.x code.
What about bitrate? The developers had to balance quality vs download time. Yeah, I have a huge pipe, so gimme a 1.5gb DVDIVX or SVCD, I have no problem waiting. My Movielink download took 15 minutes. But many don't have the bandwidth many
I won't even get into the DRM swamp. Yeah, all DRM can be hacked, no shit. But the question is, how do you make a relatively painless, somewhat protected experience that won't encourage mass copying and trading by people who can't hack a video driver or run screen capure video software to a gigantic drive?
Then add another few dozen issues: delivery architecture, bandwidth costs...how about windowing? Know what that is?
Movies are released in 'windows:' the first being Theatrical. Forget about seeing VOD in the Theatrical window anytime soon. Too many political issues to deal with, and besides, no one wants to fuck with box office revenue.
Lots of other windows, Airline, PPV, Home Video (Movielink's window), HBO (when no other entity other than HBO can show the film), Broadcast.
So, if you were planning Movielink, how do you offer content that is in a window that appeals to most people, but doesn't piss off your business partners ? (HBO, MSO's, Wal-Mart, etc...) Not so simple.
And remember, Movielink is not a single entity, but a joint venture of five Hollywood studios. Do you have any concept of what it must be like to get five studios to agree on anything? Remember, every movie encode has to be approved by the studio, plus the director, producer and talent. A fucking nightmare scenario. Add that to five sets of movie execs, each who want to put their own stamp on the business, and increase their own revenue.
Now, build a technology that all five sets of movie execs approve, that all five sets of movie execs agree will generate revenue, that all five are willing to commit their most precious resource: their intellectual property.
Now, make it so that the geeks on
Anyone remember what AOL looked like as they changed from Quantum Link (C64/128 only) to a mass market business? It sucked. Remember the first weeks of Amazon and all those 404s? Every business has growing pains and Movielink will have more than most.
Give it a chance.
Nice post. I agree by and large.
* they sell your shit
Yep, they arrange with both brick and mortar retailers (B&N, Tower, HMV, Sam Goody) and digital retailers (Amazon, CDNow) globally to put your music in their bins. Now, how good your placement is, how much in store advertising you are given is based on how much your label likes you, and how many CDs you'll probably sell. Moby? Front and center. End caps. Posters. A "rub Moby's bald head for luck" cardboard cutout at the door.
Fluffy and the Puffboys? 2 CDs in the "F" bin.
* they distribute your shit
Well, they sign with distributors, but ok, they manage your distribution.
* they promote your shit
True, but again, the amount and energy of that promotion will be very different for Linkin Park than for up-and-coming punk band Pus Casserole.
* they book your shit
Touring? Don't you have a booking agent? A sponsor? You might think about that.
* they speak "on your behalf" in these kinda situations
Again true, but the RIAA is much more of the "industry voice." And yeah, label attorneys are typically pretty good.
I mean, don't get me wrong. Even with all these advantages there are significant disadvantages:
* you must sell or you are dropped
* you get a fraction of what you'd make on an indie
* you often end up owing the label money
* occasional legal nightmares
These are minor to you? As I said, I spent fifteen years in the business, and I know of a few multi-platinum artists that either never recouped, or have such gargatuan legal bills that any profit is long gone.
Here's another one for you to ponder (and reply to if ya like.) Whose count do you accept when royalty time comes along? Every six months I get at least twenty phonebook sized royalty statements, telling me how many copies of a particular album sold in Burkina Faso, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago, South Africa, Israel, Anguilla, yada yada. I get an equvalent sized package from my publisher, with similarly arcane Excel effluvia. I think I read one once. Reversed, they make wonderful scratch printer paper, but otherwise, they mean little to me (except for the attached check which is always disappointingly low.)
I wouldn't even know where to go to get an independent auditor but I know of a few bands that did, and let's say...their figures differed from the publisher and label. A lot.
Basically, the labels/publishers tell you how many sold, and the band usually has to take that word as gospel. You comfortable with that?
In short, while there are big issues, I think labels DEFINITELY have a function. MP3.com proved that mass Internet distribution is a joke. The labels may have an 85% failure rate, but they are damn good marketers, and Kazaa would be much less popular without BMG music.
What films do people request on IRC film channels? The ones all over TV and print advertising. What CDs are most anticipated by the unwashed masses? The one's most heavily marketed. They watch the QT trailer for Nemesis with drooling glee. They hear a new Korn CD is forthcoming on radio and TV. And what do they say?
"Hey I gotta download that when it comes out."
Labels and film studios are neither anachronisms or useless. They still serve an essential function, and you're right - no signed artist would think that their label is merely a manufacturer.
Things have to change, but labels aren't going anywhere.
I have a modded (Apple) and an unmodded PS2. The copy works fine in the modded PS2 but not in the unmodded one. For that, you'll have to use the master disk provided with the software.
I'm probably being overcautious: if you don't chuck the thing around, I'm sure it'll be fine.
Smart move - I had to buy both my net adapters on ebay for $55 each. None anywhere around here.
And unfortunately, it only supports he Sony Net Adapter: I tried numerous USB to Ether adaptors and none would work. But I can tell you it works on both modded (Apple) and unmodded PS2s.
Since the PS2 Qcast disk must be in the PS2 when using Qcast, I got worried about someone taking it out, chucking it on the floor and scratching or losing it. Clone CD gave me a perfect copy and I can keep the original safely in the case. Just a suggestion.
Spiderman may have cost $139M to make, but I'm sure Sony spent a lot on advertising and other promotion as well.
;)
Yep, probably almost as much as it cost to make the film, which is why they need to gross double to break even.
And Sony doesn't get every penny of the box office either, much of it surely goes to the individual theaters.
Where did I imply that Sony Pictures takes 100% of box office? But you're inaccurate anyway: "much" of box office revenue doesn't go to theaters, at least not for the first, juicy weeks of a films' release. During the film's opening week, the studios typically takes up to 80 percent of gross box office. By the fifth or sixth week, the percentage the studio takes will perhaps shrink to about 35-40 percent, but unless you have a Titanic or Fat Greek Wedding, by that time, the film has moved on.
Without concession stands many theaters would have to close.
The rest of your calculations are similarly bogus. You clearly have no understanding of how the entertainment business works so quit pretending.
Yes, you're clearly the expert here.
Because you have not proven the following assertion to the satisfaction of most Slashdot readers:
Well, a previous poster referred to the Sony Music financials, where they lost $46mm on revenue of $1.x billion. If they are sharing revenue with Sony Electronics, then they are doing so under the table, as Sony Electronics is quite profitable. And if they are doing that, you're absolutely right: I can't prove it.
But as far as legal revenue sharing, the SME Y2001 financials don't show any revenue from electronics.