Actually last season they had ALL the games available. I listened to every Red Sox game here in San Francisco, yes there were ads, but it was unlikely that I was going to go to Bob's Store, or buy a Jordan's Ball Park Frank anytime soon due to the fact the closest one was 3000 miles away. So you have to listen to ads, what the fuck else are you going to do between innings. Sucks that they are going to charge $10 for me to listen to any Major League Baseball game in the country for the entire season, but hey I couldn't believe that it had been free, think if I was in Maine I could have listened to the games on Boston radio as opposed to WOXO who had paid for the exclusive rights in the area I used to live in.
I guess the money that the artist and record company would have been paid were you to legally procure said works is besides the point. BTW artists are paid between 8 and 12 cents a song for publishing (BMI/ASCAP), which should include live works and covers, it is paid to the one who wrote the song. Thus at 171 songs per user and 60 million users equals $1 billion just for shared songs, we haven't even started talking about leaches.
You would be better off finding a shoutcast server which play these bands that pays BMI and ASCAP fee's so that way the bands are paid. Then go out and buy their amazing CD's. So that way these guys can still make music instead of having to work for kinko's to eat. These bands are still copyrighted, thus YOU have no rights to distribute their work.
Kid yourself all you want to. Lets look at the stores near univesities that blocked napster ports (I would assume that opennap servers are running internally though.)
I didn't say anywhere that copies where not allowed. Look at the definition on fair use (see www.benedict.com), read what I wrote carefully. To Paraphrase.... I said that to most/.ers fair use means Napster, which will cause legislation that will infringe on artistic fair use. Home copies are fine, just make your own, before you lose your CD, hell I don't even care if you take the time to make a copy of the CD for your friend. However distributing straight copyrighted work without authorization is NOT covered under fair use, nor should it be.
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
You have a problem understanding the concept of cause and effect. That 1.4 billion number where does that come from, maybe a fucking great economy, without Napster it could have been much higher. There was also a study which showed that sales at record stores near colleges plummeted about the same time that napster came on the scene.
Sorry this is NOT what average/.er believes that fair use should be, they believe that "trading" files via Napster should be fair use. Calling this guy a troll weakens your own argument merits.
What he said was that the average/.ers desire for fair use, "file sharing" is IP piracy. This is certainly true. You are allowed to copy your CD's, however don't wax poetic about losing your copies and needing Napster to get another copy, or independent artists using it to distribute (Napster is the last place that I as an independent artist would distribute), as that usage is statistically insignificant compared to the infringing usage.
You do pay the radio stations, you listen to the ads and every now and then you pay for a service. If you don't then enough other people do that it is paid for. The artist DOES get paid by the radio station via ASCAP and BMI fees. YOU choose to post on a public forum, thus you have no rights to demand payment. PEOPLE DESERVE TO BE PAID FOR THEIR WORK. If you don't like what they are charging, then pay for someone elses that is charging you what you are willing to pay. I don't suppose you would like it if at the end of a month your employer decicded that you only are worth %1 of your salary because that is at it costs to feed you.
These are all publicly traded companies so their books are open, they can't hold on to money that is not in their books. So expenses HAVE to go where they are written to go. It is possible that some execs are embezzling, but that hurts the bottom line so it is in their best interest to ferret out embezzlers.
Artist's have every right to distribute their tunes however they want to. I haven't seen Napster users care in the least bit if the artist doesn't want their music pirated. It is easy to find Metalica, Aimee Mann, Courtney Love, She said that RIAA and Napster sucks, everyone seems to ignore that part rant, which was the only original part.
And they do, there are many artist's who own their own record companies, Dead Kennedys, Ani Difranco, Beastie Boys to name a few, also there are record companies, Touch and Go for one, that give 50% royalties to their artists, guess what, I can find all of these bands on Napster. Either way, the record companys get a large percentage of the royalties, because they take all of the chances on the artists, they front the money for the studio, tour, equiptment (Bands get to keep the instruments, and cloths they buy with the record company allowence no matter how many records they sell). The less money that is in the music industry the less interesting music we will get. Ricky Martin's will always make money, it is people like Aimee Mann that will say "fuck this, I am going to be a web developer, that way I can get paid", then guess what the talentless/.'ers will be forced to take orders at the local BK because the real jobs will go to people with talent, and are willing to work for a living.
College kids stapped for cash, give me a break, that is one of the most affluent groups in the country, most people in america don't have $30K a year to live in a country club, but most kids who go to private schools are.
Don't tell me you were not warned, see Bruce Perens Napster article, he said that this exact type of thing would happen as a response to the irresponsible use of P2P piracy.
Stop whining about how the man is keeping you down, stop using these devices, go outside, live life, don't like it don't support it.
your first line was "I'm not sure I'd trust Google with this information any more than I'd trust Amazon"
Amazon does not have this information, Alexa does, that is implying that Alexa is Amazon. Alexa does NOT share its data with Amazon.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually last season they had ALL the games available. I listened to every Red Sox game here in San Francisco, yes there were ads, but it was unlikely that I was going to go to Bob's Store, or buy a Jordan's Ball Park Frank anytime soon due to the fact the closest one was 3000 miles away. So you have to listen to ads, what the fuck else are you going to do between innings. Sucks that they are going to charge $10 for me to listen to any Major League Baseball game in the country for the entire season, but hey I couldn't believe that it had been free, think if I was in Maine I could have listened to the games on Boston radio as opposed to WOXO who had paid for the exclusive rights in the area I used to live in.
I guess the money that the artist and record company would have been paid were you to legally procure said works is besides the point. BTW artists are paid between 8 and 12 cents a song for publishing (BMI/ASCAP), which should include live works and covers, it is paid to the one who wrote the song. Thus at 171 songs per user and 60 million users equals $1 billion just for shared songs, we haven't even started talking about leaches.
You need the learn what obvious means to the patent office. What you have written is far from that definition.
You would be better off finding a shoutcast server which play these bands that pays BMI and ASCAP fee's so that way the bands are paid. Then go out and buy their amazing CD's. So that way these guys can still make music instead of having to work for kinko's to eat. These bands are still copyrighted, thus YOU have no rights to distribute their work.
Kid yourself all you want to. Lets look at the stores near univesities that blocked napster ports (I would assume that opennap servers are running internally though.)
I didn't say anywhere that copies where not allowed. Look at the definition on fair use (see www.benedict.com), read what I wrote carefully. To Paraphrase.... I said that to most /.ers fair use means Napster, which will cause legislation that will infringe on artistic fair use. Home copies are fine, just make your own, before you lose your CD, hell I don't even care if you take the time to make a copy of the CD for your friend. However distributing straight copyrighted work without authorization is NOT covered under fair use, nor should it be.
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -
You have a problem understanding the concept of cause and effect. That 1.4 billion number where does that come from, maybe a fucking great economy, without Napster it could have been much higher. There was also a study which showed that sales at record stores near colleges plummeted about the same time that napster came on the scene.
That my friend is the DEFINITION of fair use. Using other art to create a larger work.
Sorry this is NOT what average /.er believes that fair use should be, they believe that "trading" files via Napster should be fair use. Calling this guy a troll weakens your own argument merits.
What he said was that the average /.ers desire for fair use, "file sharing" is IP piracy. This is certainly true. You are allowed to copy your CD's, however don't wax poetic about losing your copies and needing Napster to get another copy, or independent artists using it to distribute (Napster is the last place that I as an independent artist would distribute), as that usage is statistically insignificant compared to the infringing usage.
Nuff Said
This isn't law, it is Napster. Bitch to them if you are banned and think you shouldn't be.
You do pay the radio stations, you listen to the ads and every now and then you pay for a service. If you don't then enough other people do that it is paid for. The artist DOES get paid by the radio station via ASCAP and BMI fees. YOU choose to post on a public forum, thus you have no rights to demand payment. PEOPLE DESERVE TO BE PAID FOR THEIR WORK. If you don't like what they are charging, then pay for someone elses that is charging you what you are willing to pay. I don't suppose you would like it if at the end of a month your employer decicded that you only are worth %1 of your salary because that is at it costs to feed you.
These are all publicly traded companies so their books are open, they can't hold on to money that is not in their books. So expenses HAVE to go where they are written to go. It is possible that some execs are embezzling, but that hurts the bottom line so it is in their best interest to ferret out embezzlers.
This article displays absolutely no where that Napster HELPS the RIAA sell records.
Artist's have every right to distribute their tunes however they want to. I haven't seen Napster users care in the least bit if the artist doesn't want their music pirated. It is easy to find Metalica, Aimee Mann, Courtney Love, She said that RIAA and Napster sucks, everyone seems to ignore that part rant, which was the only original part. And they do, there are many artist's who own their own record companies, Dead Kennedys, Ani Difranco, Beastie Boys to name a few, also there are record companies, Touch and Go for one, that give 50% royalties to their artists, guess what, I can find all of these bands on Napster. Either way, the record companys get a large percentage of the royalties, because they take all of the chances on the artists, they front the money for the studio, tour, equiptment (Bands get to keep the instruments, and cloths they buy with the record company allowence no matter how many records they sell). The less money that is in the music industry the less interesting music we will get. Ricky Martin's will always make money, it is people like Aimee Mann that will say "fuck this, I am going to be a web developer, that way I can get paid", then guess what the talentless /.'ers will be forced to take orders at the local BK because the real jobs will go to people with talent, and are willing to work for a living.
While device is spelled correctly, the word should be devise.
I think I have seen this before, PureFiction isn't hypemaster extraodinar Zanshin is he?
Bruce Parens said this exact thing would happen in the technocrat. But everyone seemed to ignore this guy when he preaches honesty.
College kids stapped for cash, give me a break, that is one of the most affluent groups in the country, most people in america don't have $30K a year to live in a country club, but most kids who go to private schools are. Don't tell me you were not warned, see Bruce Perens Napster article, he said that this exact type of thing would happen as a response to the irresponsible use of P2P piracy. Stop whining about how the man is keeping you down, stop using these devices, go outside, live life, don't like it don't support it.
Until you can show your source this is pretty much libel, Slashdot would be wise to remove this story.
your first line was "I'm not sure I'd trust Google with this information any more than I'd trust Amazon"
Amazon does not have this information, Alexa does, that is implying that Alexa is Amazon. Alexa does NOT share its data with Amazon.
Uh guys Alexa has had almost all the same features for 4 years (and they give much information on what they do with the trails the whole time)
Alexa is NOT Amazon, it is an independant subsidiary. It is run by true geeks (Brewster Kahle), with a kick ass crawl on Linux and FreeBSD.