Napster's dead baby. Napster's dead.
Being able to find RIAA approved song X on-line, quite frankly is a minute thing. What I'm interested in is the songs that for the most part NEVER crosses that line, and likewise, presence on a Bertelsman-run Napster would be unlikely.
What I used Napster for is a combination of unreleased material live "bootleg" recordings and indy music. Things that the RIAA for the most part have no control over. I did use Napster as on-demand radio at times sampling new music, then either rewarding the artist and deleting and I used Napster in-lieu of a MP3 ripper on my old 166 computer, too slow for a good rip, but could run Napster. (Which I need no longer)
There's more at stake than copyright in this matter. P2P threatens to break the monopoly the RIAA and its clients have on music inside the US. That's the major issue here.
The main reason for that, is that the people who want to eliminate frivilous lawsuits only want to eliminate it when it comes to corporations. They'd still allow the typical SLAPP to occur.
From a purely economic standpoint, the black/gray market is an integral part of maintaining a proper price point.
The higher the profit margain (even percieved), the more people will go to outside the market. Then it becomes a balancing act of what the customer would pay.
Although I agree that this will in the long run reduce the influence of big corps, the problem is that it's sort of a scorched earth strategy. Most of the problems don't come from a software standpoint, but a hardware standpoint. As far as I know, this would change the whole open standard as there is when it comes to hardware. Would it be even possible to have things such as Linux or your average open-source utility on a closed-rights system?
Somehow I doubt it.
Actually they are, and it makes quite a bit of sense actually.
Think about it for a second. This legislation would mean the end of the technology race as we know it. The computer market would hit rock bottom. No faster computers==no must-buy upgrades for software (the BSA!), that people have to buy every two years or so.
The end of the computer market would be bad for the BSA as well, lest their opposition.
Am I the only person who has a real interest in this sort of thing?
I would pay a pretty substantial amount of money.. (say 100 or so), to have those individual musical tracks. I think there would be a good amount of interest in that.
Actually Chuck Jones is getting next to nothing for all the work he's done over the years.
Yes let me repeat that.
Next to nothing.
It seems that he was one of the original artists (and he was an artist) to get slammed with a "work for hire" clause in his contract. After he was forced out of WB, he recieved very little renumeration for his years of work.
However, that's not to say he died a poor man, hardly the case. He spent the last few years of his life recreating some of the classic scenes from the cartoons for sale. He made quite a pile that way.
Something telling in this story I think.
Although in some ways FF:TSW is not very good (there wasn't enough time to flesh out most of the characters, although the story as a whole was quite imaginative.) as a whole, I thought it was a very good movie.
Comparing it to Shrek or Monsters Inc. is not entirely fair. Where those movies were rather light-hearted romps, FF:TSW is a rather dark movie. Just like anime, there isn't really a place for it in the American market.
To paraphrase an old comercial.."It's a good movie..BUT IT'S NOT FF"
Slashdot Mirror
Napster's dead baby. Napster's dead. Being able to find RIAA approved song X on-line, quite frankly is a minute thing. What I'm interested in is the songs that for the most part NEVER crosses that line, and likewise, presence on a Bertelsman-run Napster would be unlikely. What I used Napster for is a combination of unreleased material live "bootleg" recordings and indy music. Things that the RIAA for the most part have no control over. I did use Napster as on-demand radio at times sampling new music, then either rewarding the artist and deleting and I used Napster in-lieu of a MP3 ripper on my old 166 computer, too slow for a good rip, but could run Napster. (Which I need no longer) There's more at stake than copyright in this matter. P2P threatens to break the monopoly the RIAA and its clients have on music inside the US. That's the major issue here.
The main reason for that, is that the people who want to eliminate frivilous lawsuits only want to eliminate it when it comes to corporations. They'd still allow the typical SLAPP to occur.
A federal anti-SLAPP law will never happen.
From a purely economic standpoint, the black/gray market is an integral part of maintaining a proper price point. The higher the profit margain (even percieved), the more people will go to outside the market. Then it becomes a balancing act of what the customer would pay.
Although I agree that this will in the long run reduce the influence of big corps, the problem is that it's sort of a scorched earth strategy. Most of the problems don't come from a software standpoint, but a hardware standpoint. As far as I know, this would change the whole open standard as there is when it comes to hardware. Would it be even possible to have things such as Linux or your average open-source utility on a closed-rights system? Somehow I doubt it.
Actually they are, and it makes quite a bit of sense actually.
Think about it for a second. This legislation would mean the end of the technology race as we know it. The computer market would hit rock bottom. No faster computers==no must-buy upgrades for software (the BSA!), that people have to buy every two years or so.
The end of the computer market would be bad for the BSA as well, lest their opposition.
Am I the only person who has a real interest in this sort of thing?
I would pay a pretty substantial amount of money.. (say 100 or so), to have those individual musical tracks. I think there would be a good amount of interest in that.
I can connect to bnetd servers. I cannot connect to battle.net.
I do own a copy of starcraft.
Legitimate use that doesn't involve copying.
Go away.
The problem as I see it, is that the burden of proof would be on the indie to prove that the RIAA didn't own the music.
In other words, they'd be SLAPP'd out of business.
Actually Chuck Jones is getting next to nothing for all the work he's done over the years. Yes let me repeat that. Next to nothing. It seems that he was one of the original artists (and he was an artist) to get slammed with a "work for hire" clause in his contract. After he was forced out of WB, he recieved very little renumeration for his years of work. However, that's not to say he died a poor man, hardly the case. He spent the last few years of his life recreating some of the classic scenes from the cartoons for sale. He made quite a pile that way. Something telling in this story I think.
Although in some ways FF:TSW is not very good (there wasn't enough time to flesh out most of the characters, although the story as a whole was quite imaginative.) as a whole, I thought it was a very good movie. Comparing it to Shrek or Monsters Inc. is not entirely fair. Where those movies were rather light-hearted romps, FF:TSW is a rather dark movie. Just like anime, there isn't really a place for it in the American market. To paraphrase an old comercial.."It's a good movie..BUT IT'S NOT FF"