The record label owns the right to the recording. Regardless of who owns the copyright on the lyrics and the music, any recorded music by the copyright holder is owned by the record label and royalties are paid to the artist per contract.
Secondly, most artists also sell their publishing rights. They do this because it is the easiest way to get money up front, and the publishing company's sole job is to push the music to more venues of revenue. So when Joe buys a CD or a company pays to use a song for a TV commercial, the record label and publishing company get paid. They then pay the artist royalties, per contract. Some artists hold out on publishing, and then are able to get incredible deals. I believe I remember hearing of one successful John-Mayer-type artist who debuted in 2003/4 had held onto his publishing rights through his debut album, and was looking at a million dollar publishing deal prior to recording his new release.
Artists that do not get fairly negotiated contracts lose money because they naively give labels and publishing groups the ability to pay out less or no royalties in certain situations.
re Shacknews: "Gamasutra points out that while Nintendo is suffering from reduced profits, neither Sony nor Microsoft's Xbox division are currently making any profit."
Anyone else having trouble staying logged in? It won't stay signed in for more than a few minutes, which basically makes the site worthless when you have to resign in everytime.
I use IE, and I've added google.com to my Sites list for cookies, but no dice. Think it could have something to do with having the temp files option set to "Check for newer versions of pages: every visit to the page"? I don't want to have to change this setting, though.
Any suggestions?
I was always under the assumption that you were paying for someone's work of art. Being a musician makes it a lot harder to produce free "open-source" material. The majority of profits made from you purchasing a CD SHOULD go to those musicians. Although a few artists, Don Henley and Dixie Chicks come to mind in particular, tried to bring artists together to combat the RIAA, somehow everyone got sidetracked into this filesharing witchhunt controversy. The RIAA is doing an excellent job of tricking us into thinking that's their concern these days.
If the linux community used half the time it spent slamming and trying to discredit Bill Gates and Microsoft in general towards improving linux, MS would probably not be able to compete and be out of business by now.
Are there any problems or security issues doing everything as administrator with Windows XP Professional? I'm just a personal user, and other than using client software for many internet uses, I don't server anything. And problems other than "the fact that Windows sucks" would be nice.;)
There were probably 10 people who heard about the album on slashdot and bought it to 'help the cause.' Everyone else bought it because a) they're Wilco fans, b) they bought into the critics and fans hype of the album, but most importantly, c) they were able to download it from the internet from free, see for themselves how truly an amazing album it was, and decided to buy it. Very few people have the money laying around to support a random cause, but chances are they do have the money to buy an incredible album that they'll get plenty of play time out of. Slashdot has nothing to do with this, so I think this comment should not be taken into considereation. People still believe in plain ol good music, the record companies haven't taken that away from us.
I think it's obvious tha tno one is attacking the law here...well, then again, I'm sure there are a few people here that are...but the main point is, fans are upset that Lucas seems to be going to many lengths lately to protect his franchise, at the expense of some of the most die-hard fans.
It's not about right or wrong anymore. It's about money. There's no need to even discuss this or comment on any comments the industry makes considering right and wrong, because it's not important. It should be, but it's not.
The media industry (audio and video) is determined to do whatever will give them the most profit, or more likely, reduce lost profits. I say that, because they could probably increase profits if they went along with the flow of this file sharing revolution rather than fighting it as strong as they are.
Right and wrong stopped mattering the moment the media industry took control of it. Now they make the laws (with the help of self-admitted naive lawmakers) that determine right and wrong.
On a positive note, Wilco's new album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot hit stores today. I'd recommend picking it up. Reprise gave one listen to it and kicked the band off their label. Nonesuch Records picked the band up. Interesting enough, AOL Time Warner owns both Reprise and Nonesuch...isn't this industry great? Anyways, this horrible horrible album that Reprise threw away to Nonesuch is quoted by Rolling Stone as "The first great album of the year." They also gave it 4 stars. Show the record industry that the people decide what's good music, not them. Don't buy J.Lo. Support Wilco!
Being geek is a state of mind, it's not a seperate entity or anything. I love outdoors, and I do a lot of outdoors-y stuff, like climbing, camping, fording rivers and creeks, hiking, etc etc...
At the same time, when I'm indoors, I'm constantly into gadgets and computers and other electronic stuff. But I would probably be insulted if someone labeled me as a geek.
My point is, don't think of it from a "geek" perspective. I don't consider myself one, and I don't want to be considered as one, but that doesn't prevent me from reading slashdot and tweaking my computer constantly. Don't let being a geek prevent you from playing football or rock climbing or even sunbathing. Be proud to be a geek. But don't be too proud to have fun.
Why use french google? And I believe his point of the article was to get outside opinion. As a UNC student myself, I've wondered about and have researched the topic. Chances are, the articles he'll find on long range wireless internet will not focus on being an alternative internet source for college students, so why not ask to see if any college students have any experience or opinions with this topic? Don't be a troll.
I'm not making a comparision between the two, I'm saying that might could deny reliability just as file sharing programs do. These programs say that they just exist, it's the users that are providing and actually making the connection to share content. So no, there is no relation between open relay and file sharing...but there could be in how it's handled legally.
I suppose he leaves his front door unlocked too so his friends can watch cable whenever they like?
I've done this plenty of times. I guess that's why the last time I came home my air conditioning was set on 50, the oven was still on, and all my french bread pizzas were gone.:[
Jokes aside, there are sometimes that you just have to take responsibility for something. And this is one of those times. His refusal to close it is just plain a) apathy b) want for attention c) pathetic.
Ok, maybe his defense is the same of that used by file sharing programs, which unfortunately might make hypocrites out of a lot of us who complain, but anybody with common sense would know how to handle this situation. Don't be rude, Gilmore, close the damn relay!
So as far as I can tell, unless content providers (or their representatives) try to prevent massive distribution of illegal content they will all go out of business, and that's what all want, isn't it?
The problem with the music industry at the moment is before the possibility of file sharing, artists and the labels were on the same page. The labels worked for the artists and made money. And while they were making money, they really talked it up as if they were doing it all for the artists. The fact is, the best interest of the label at the time was to support the artists rights. Now, times have changed, and because of that, the record label is changing to continue doing what is best for them...however, this happens NOT to be best for the artists anymore, AND it goes against what the labels have promised to the artists.
Check out the RAC for more. Don Henley and tons of other artists are doing some really good work for artists rights.
Now, this may appear off topic because the article is about the movie industry, but if you take away the artists as the variable and leave the same effect on the industry and the public, it's just the same as the movie industry. Record companies are doing everything they can to maximize profits in the short-run...movie companies are doing the same.
If the industry would work with this, then eventually they would have the control they want over it. They would also have more profits. True, the industry would be more profitable if piracy didn't exist at all, but the industry (both movie and music) refuses to accept this. The example of artists just goes to prove my point...they're willing to damage the relationship with the very thing that makes them money to begin with just because they are too stubborn to accept the fact that times are changing.
Like I saw someone post on/. a few weeks ago, they need to stop crying to the courts everytime they lose a penny...the laws protect the rights of the industry, but it never had the right to protect profitability...it's a free market. However, with practices that the RIAA and others have been doing lately (there's some good articles in Rolling Stone that describe the RIAA paying congressmen to slip in laws with big bills that support the industry, but basically go unnoticed...things like preventing artists from buying back their own works) they may actually be able to buy that full protection. Congressmen need to get more educated on the matter...lawyers are winning cases (same with computer issues) because the courts don't understand it. That is ridiculous. Okay, enough rambling...
The treaties outlaw attempts to circumvent encryption and other techniques designed to prevent unauthorised copying and ensure royalties are paid. - FTC site: yesterday's story on the treaty
I'll be the first to admit that this whole thing confuses me. Yet, I don't really know any details behind the WIPO or the DMCA, so it's no surprise that this is going to blow right past me.
But as a media production major at UNC Chapel Hill, I need to understand this stuff, because obviously it will affect my future work one day.
It appears to me that this treaty is way too broad, and will only cause problems. I'm gonna try and explain some of these as good as I can guess at them, and I'd appreciate if someone would clear me up on this.
Ok, so if a record company puts its music library online, then that will show the courts that there is an original source online which the copyrighted/pirated material came from. This will help lawyers for record companies in court protect their copyrights.
Well, it seems like there would still be a way around this with different formats out there. However, the fact that copyright protection extends to "expressions", then they could cancel that idea out. However, it seems like that would fringe on a LOT of our established rights.
I've got plenty more to question and talk about, but I'm headed down for food...leave me some comments and then I'll be back shortly for more!
Ruben also questioned the authenticity of the specimen, calling for a CAT scan to determine whether the entire fossil slab comes from the same source.
"There is no reason to CAT scan this specimen, because clearly it's not pieced together," Norell said. "It is preserved on one large slab, and we have both part and counterpart." Part and counterpart refers to both the top and bottom, or both sides, of the fossil slab.
I don't know anything about this kind of stuff, but what would be the downside of going along with a CAT scan? I don't know the costs/risks involved, so it may be an outrageous or dangerous project with regard to the specimen, but common sense seems like it would be best to test it every possible way we know how...considering we don't have many ways to test this stuff.
Here at UNC Chapel Hill, incoming freshmen required (or so they trick you into thinking) to buy laptops through the school (Carolina Computing Initiative). Price is kind of cheap, but the warrenty, repair, and insurance provided is pretty decent. The software provided is everything a basic student needs (check the CCI site as well as the downloads). I signed up for introduction to computer programming my freshman year, and everyone got a copy of Visual J++ 6.0. Office XP is $10 bucks through student stores.
Along with this and the increasing amount of freeware out there, who really needs anything else? You've got your instant messenger, you've got your winamp, you've got your snood...90% of college kids are set for 4 (or 5) years without ever needing any type of upgrade! That way we can spend money on our DVDs and blank CDs (which is of course offered standard with the most purchased model through CCI). That just leaves piracy to mp3s, which only hurts the RIAA because of their stance on the matter...don't get me started on this one, I could go extremely off topic:oP
I didn't exactly mean "Jesus cloning" but if we could find any of his DNA, that might just do the trick.;)
I have a feeling that being involved in that project would probably ensure your chances of eternal damnation...
I wonder if US scientists will start travelling to Europe and getting involved. This probably isn't a bad thing, after losing my best friend to cystic fibrosis, I'd give anything to see some sort of miracle...whether it's in the form of Jesus or embryo cloning.
A major flaw with this is the fact that at most riots, the police want the suspects to leave, therefore ending the riot. With this, you're forcing the people to stay at the scene, which kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
Even if they design the stuff to wear off after a certain amount of time, you're going to have some bruised and pissed off rioters on your hands.
Like I saw mentioned in another post, what happens if someone gets seriously injured? This just seems to be one giant lawsuit waiting to happen. I think they should focus their energy and time more on preventing riots than dealing with them, especially in manners like this.
This could have been already pointed out in another post, but it says pretty clearly on the FAQ:
How do you verify the accuracy of Slashdot stories?
We don't. You do.:) If something seems outrageous, we might look for some corroboration, but as a rule, we regard this as the responsibility of the submitter and the audience. This is why it's important to read comments. You might find something that refutes, or supports, the story in the main.
Slashdot Mirror
The record label owns the right to the recording. Regardless of who owns the copyright on the lyrics and the music, any recorded music by the copyright holder is owned by the record label and royalties are paid to the artist per contract.
Secondly, most artists also sell their publishing rights. They do this because it is the easiest way to get money up front, and the publishing company's sole job is to push the music to more venues of revenue. So when Joe buys a CD or a company pays to use a song for a TV commercial, the record label and publishing company get paid. They then pay the artist royalties, per contract. Some artists hold out on publishing, and then are able to get incredible deals. I believe I remember hearing of one successful John-Mayer-type artist who debuted in 2003/4 had held onto his publishing rights through his debut album, and was looking at a million dollar publishing deal prior to recording his new release.
Artists that do not get fairly negotiated contracts lose money because they naively give labels and publishing groups the ability to pay out less or no royalties in certain situations.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?st ory=6051
re Shacknews: "Gamasutra points out that while Nintendo is suffering from reduced profits, neither Sony nor Microsoft's Xbox division are currently making any profit."
Anyone else having trouble staying logged in? It won't stay signed in for more than a few minutes, which basically makes the site worthless when you have to resign in everytime. I use IE, and I've added google.com to my Sites list for cookies, but no dice. Think it could have something to do with having the temp files option set to "Check for newer versions of pages: every visit to the page"? I don't want to have to change this setting, though. Any suggestions?
I was always under the assumption that you were paying for someone's work of art. Being a musician makes it a lot harder to produce free "open-source" material. The majority of profits made from you purchasing a CD SHOULD go to those musicians. Although a few artists, Don Henley and Dixie Chicks come to mind in particular, tried to bring artists together to combat the RIAA, somehow everyone got sidetracked into this filesharing witchhunt controversy. The RIAA is doing an excellent job of tricking us into thinking that's their concern these days.
If the linux community used half the time it spent slamming and trying to discredit Bill Gates and Microsoft in general towards improving linux, MS would probably not be able to compete and be out of business by now.
Are there any problems or security issues doing everything as administrator with Windows XP Professional? I'm just a personal user, and other than using client software for many internet uses, I don't server anything. And problems other than "the fact that Windows sucks" would be nice. ;)
There were probably 10 people who heard about the album on slashdot and bought it to 'help the cause.' Everyone else bought it because a) they're Wilco fans, b) they bought into the critics and fans hype of the album, but most importantly, c) they were able to download it from the internet from free, see for themselves how truly an amazing album it was, and decided to buy it. Very few people have the money laying around to support a random cause, but chances are they do have the money to buy an incredible album that they'll get plenty of play time out of. Slashdot has nothing to do with this, so I think this comment should not be taken into considereation. People still believe in plain ol good music, the record companies haven't taken that away from us.
I think it's obvious tha tno one is attacking the law here...well, then again, I'm sure there are a few people here that are...but the main point is, fans are upset that Lucas seems to be going to many lengths lately to protect his franchise, at the expense of some of the most die-hard fans.
It's not about right or wrong anymore. It's about money. There's no need to even discuss this or comment on any comments the industry makes considering right and wrong, because it's not important. It should be, but it's not.
The media industry (audio and video) is determined to do whatever will give them the most profit, or more likely, reduce lost profits. I say that, because they could probably increase profits if they went along with the flow of this file sharing revolution rather than fighting it as strong as they are.
Right and wrong stopped mattering the moment the media industry took control of it. Now they make the laws (with the help of self-admitted naive lawmakers) that determine right and wrong.
On a positive note, Wilco's new album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot hit stores today. I'd recommend picking it up. Reprise gave one listen to it and kicked the band off their label. Nonesuch Records picked the band up. Interesting enough, AOL Time Warner owns both Reprise and Nonesuch...isn't this industry great? Anyways, this horrible horrible album that Reprise threw away to Nonesuch is quoted by Rolling Stone as "The first great album of the year." They also gave it 4 stars. Show the record industry that the people decide what's good music, not them. Don't buy J.Lo. Support Wilco!
Being geek is a state of mind, it's not a seperate entity or anything. I love outdoors, and I do a lot of outdoors-y stuff, like climbing, camping, fording rivers and creeks, hiking, etc etc...
At the same time, when I'm indoors, I'm constantly into gadgets and computers and other electronic stuff. But I would probably be insulted if someone labeled me as a geek.
My point is, don't think of it from a "geek" perspective. I don't consider myself one, and I don't want to be considered as one, but that doesn't prevent me from reading slashdot and tweaking my computer constantly. Don't let being a geek prevent you from playing football or rock climbing or even sunbathing. Be proud to be a geek. But don't be too proud to have fun.
Why use french google? And I believe his point of the article was to get outside opinion. As a UNC student myself, I've wondered about and have researched the topic. Chances are, the articles he'll find on long range wireless internet will not focus on being an alternative internet source for college students, so why not ask to see if any college students have any experience or opinions with this topic? Don't be a troll.
I'm not making a comparision between the two, I'm saying that might could deny reliability just as file sharing programs do. These programs say that they just exist, it's the users that are providing and actually making the connection to share content. So no, there is no relation between open relay and file sharing...but there could be in how it's handled legally.
I suppose he leaves his front door unlocked too so his friends can watch cable whenever they like?
:[
I've done this plenty of times. I guess that's why the last time I came home my air conditioning was set on 50, the oven was still on, and all my french bread pizzas were gone.
Jokes aside, there are sometimes that you just have to take responsibility for something. And this is one of those times. His refusal to close it is just plain a) apathy b) want for attention c) pathetic.
Ok, maybe his defense is the same of that used by file sharing programs, which unfortunately might make hypocrites out of a lot of us who complain, but anybody with common sense would know how to handle this situation. Don't be rude, Gilmore, close the damn relay!
So as far as I can tell, unless content providers (or their representatives) try to prevent massive distribution of illegal content they will all go out of business, and that's what all want, isn't it?
/. a few weeks ago, they need to stop crying to the courts everytime they lose a penny...the laws protect the rights of the industry, but it never had the right to protect profitability...it's a free market. However, with practices that the RIAA and others have been doing lately (there's some good articles in Rolling Stone that describe the RIAA paying congressmen to slip in laws with big bills that support the industry, but basically go unnoticed...things like preventing artists from buying back their own works) they may actually be able to buy that full protection. Congressmen need to get more educated on the matter...lawyers are winning cases (same with computer issues) because the courts don't understand it. That is ridiculous. Okay, enough rambling...
The problem with the music industry at the moment is before the possibility of file sharing, artists and the labels were on the same page. The labels worked for the artists and made money. And while they were making money, they really talked it up as if they were doing it all for the artists. The fact is, the best interest of the label at the time was to support the artists rights. Now, times have changed, and because of that, the record label is changing to continue doing what is best for them...however, this happens NOT to be best for the artists anymore, AND it goes against what the labels have promised to the artists.
Check out the RAC for more. Don Henley and tons of other artists are doing some really good work for artists rights.
Now, this may appear off topic because the article is about the movie industry, but if you take away the artists as the variable and leave the same effect on the industry and the public, it's just the same as the movie industry. Record companies are doing everything they can to maximize profits in the short-run...movie companies are doing the same.
If the industry would work with this, then eventually they would have the control they want over it. They would also have more profits. True, the industry would be more profitable if piracy didn't exist at all, but the industry (both movie and music) refuses to accept this. The example of artists just goes to prove my point...they're willing to damage the relationship with the very thing that makes them money to begin with just because they are too stubborn to accept the fact that times are changing.
Like I saw someone post on
The treaties outlaw attempts to circumvent encryption and other techniques designed to prevent unauthorised copying and ensure royalties are paid. - FTC site: yesterday's story on the treaty
It's scary how this could be interpreted.
I'll be the first to admit that this whole thing confuses me. Yet, I don't really know any details behind the WIPO or the DMCA, so it's no surprise that this is going to blow right past me.
But as a media production major at UNC Chapel Hill, I need to understand this stuff, because obviously it will affect my future work one day.
It appears to me that this treaty is way too broad, and will only cause problems. I'm gonna try and explain some of these as good as I can guess at them, and I'd appreciate if someone would clear me up on this.
Ok, so if a record company puts its music library online, then that will show the courts that there is an original source online which the copyrighted/pirated material came from. This will help lawyers for record companies in court protect their copyrights.
Well, it seems like there would still be a way around this with different formats out there. However, the fact that copyright protection extends to "expressions", then they could cancel that idea out. However, it seems like that would fringe on a LOT of our established rights.
I've got plenty more to question and talk about, but I'm headed down for food...leave me some comments and then I'll be back shortly for more!
Ruben also questioned the authenticity of the specimen, calling for a CAT scan to determine whether the entire fossil slab comes from the same source.
"There is no reason to CAT scan this specimen, because clearly it's not pieced together," Norell said. "It is preserved on one large slab, and we have both part and counterpart." Part and counterpart refers to both the top and bottom, or both sides, of the fossil slab.
I don't know anything about this kind of stuff, but what would be the downside of going along with a CAT scan? I don't know the costs/risks involved, so it may be an outrageous or dangerous project with regard to the specimen, but common sense seems like it would be best to test it every possible way we know how...considering we don't have many ways to test this stuff.
Here at UNC Chapel Hill, incoming freshmen required (or so they trick you into thinking) to buy laptops through the school (Carolina Computing Initiative). Price is kind of cheap, but the warrenty, repair, and insurance provided is pretty decent. The software provided is everything a basic student needs (check the CCI site as well as the downloads). I signed up for introduction to computer programming my freshman year, and everyone got a copy of Visual J++ 6.0. Office XP is $10 bucks through student stores.
:oP
Along with this and the increasing amount of freeware out there, who really needs anything else? You've got your instant messenger, you've got your winamp, you've got your snood...90% of college kids are set for 4 (or 5) years without ever needing any type of upgrade! That way we can spend money on our DVDs and blank CDs (which is of course offered standard with the most purchased model through CCI). That just leaves piracy to mp3s, which only hurts the RIAA because of their stance on the matter...don't get me started on this one, I could go extremely off topic
I didn't exactly mean "Jesus cloning" but if we could find any of his DNA, that might just do the trick. ;)
I have a feeling that being involved in that project would probably ensure your chances of eternal damnation...
I wonder if US scientists will start travelling to Europe and getting involved. This probably isn't a bad thing, after losing my best friend to cystic fibrosis, I'd give anything to see some sort of miracle...whether it's in the form of Jesus or embryo cloning.
A major flaw with this is the fact that at most riots, the police want the suspects to leave, therefore ending the riot. With this, you're forcing the people to stay at the scene, which kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
Even if they design the stuff to wear off after a certain amount of time, you're going to have some bruised and pissed off rioters on your hands.
Like I saw mentioned in another post, what happens if someone gets seriously injured? This just seems to be one giant lawsuit waiting to happen. I think they should focus their energy and time more on preventing riots than dealing with them, especially in manners like this.
This could have been already pointed out in another post, but it says pretty clearly on the FAQ:
:) If something seems outrageous, we might look for some corroboration, but as a rule, we regard this as the responsibility of the submitter and the audience. This is why it's important to read comments. You might find something that refutes, or supports, the story in the main.
How do you verify the accuracy of Slashdot stories?
We don't. You do.
Answered by: CmdrTaco Last Modified: 10/28/00