Have al look at popfile, a similar service Universal set up for downloading music legally. I really do hope EMI does better...
1. No DRM in the files, ideally OGG or MP3 files.
Nope. WMA, preferably w/Windows Media Player 9.0. No support for anything but M$. Only few portable devices are supported.
2. High-quality recordings (i.e. 128-bit is quite marginal, I'm hoping for 256-bit or at least an option to choose bitrate).
Yes, the recordings are high quality - and rather large.
3. Reasonable cost. $5 per song is too much, $1 per song would be awesome.
1 per song. Now that's a deal.
What is all this talk about 'artificial/government'-control? Luckily, economy is a very democratic thing. It is us, being consumers and financers at the same time, who make the rules of the game.
Think about it: Somebody issues an investment fund, which only invests in environmentally sound corporations (read: no stone age, just companies that care more for environmental issues than their competitors). Put enough money in this fund (as pension funds?), and _that_ will make a change. Sure enough, the return would be a bit lower than the usual PROFIT-fund, but it will make a change. The problem is, that too few people (read: you an me) would invest in such a fund.
Another thought on the consumers: The next time you buy a car (or anything else), don't look too closely at the price tag or the size, or the speed, but on fuel consumption. Guess what happens. Guess why US-built cars are incredibly hard to sell in Europe.
Why trust a (more or less) corrupt politician, when you can make the change on your own? The free market is very democratic...
A company is not a social program. Once more, a company is not a social program.
Yes, you're right. But: Any corporation has responsibilities reaching beyond a monthly pay-check. (Disclaimer: I don't have the slightest idea about Coral current finacial situation. I suppose they're in big trouble..). One of these responsibilities is loyalty toward their employees (yes, this word is out of fashion). This is not only a social responsibility, since it can be applied vice-versa.
As Naomi Campbell stated, when corporations show publicly that all they care about is money, then the employees will look at the whole employment-thing the same way. Funny enough, the highly educated people are still sought after (at least in Germany, J2EE-Specialists anyone?), and corporations ask for loyalty from their best employees, a plea which is no longer sustainable since everyone knows that a large number of corporations won't wait a second to fire you as soon as the shareholders feel that a company isn't making enough money anymore.
A company, any company, exists to provide a product or service that results in what most folks hope is a positive cash flow. If that is the result, it will grow. In that growth will certainly be newer jobs.
And hopefully stash away some money, since worse times are sure to come....
The reverse is also true. If a company has proven that it cannot make money, it will shrink. In it's shrinking, fewer employment opportunities exist.
Well since they stowed away money in better times istead of paying immoraly high bonuses to anyone with a 'c' in his title or buying some almost bankrupt companies for growths sake, it is still possible to support a high number of employees until the economy improves.
No union, legislation, or any other happy thoughts can change this basic economic fact. When a company, like Corel, is no longer producing products that customers wish to buy, fewer jobs will result. How can you maintain staffing rates of old when you no longer have the cash to pay them?
Loyalty goes a long way. An example I experienced in the company i used to work for: Like most companies in the IT-business, that company faced rough times. The only possibility to suvive was to cut costs, as usual cutting down wages. Instead of firing a lot of people, the wages were cut down by 10% for 'normal' employees, and up to 20% for better earning employees in management. No bonuses were paid.
Nobody was happy about that (having children, paying mortgages, etc. pp.), but at least the company still exists (I don't work for them anymore, but for different reasons). And yes, some layoffs followed later, but i really do think they were inevitable.
The point i'm trying to make is: There are many ways to save a corporation, massive layouts is the worst way.
First off, a "right" is not what someone does for you. A "right" is what the government can not do to you. Just as true in Canada as the US, or any other country for that matter. At most, something a government does for you could only be described as a "social program".
From a german point of view, this discussion about beer is similar to people from Argentina and Brazil having about over which economy was better off....
Slashdot Mirror
Which reminds me of this: Tetrachromats Maybe we should Mrs. M. have a look at the DVD.
1. No DRM in the files, ideally OGG or MP3 files.
Nope. WMA, preferably w/Windows Media Player 9.0. No support for anything but M$. Only few portable devices are supported.
2. High-quality recordings (i.e. 128-bit is quite marginal, I'm hoping for 256-bit or at least an option to choose bitrate).
Yes, the recordings are high quality - and rather large.
3. Reasonable cost. $5 per song is too much, $1 per song would be awesome.
1 per song. Now that's a deal.
What is all this talk about 'artificial/government'-control? Luckily, economy is a very democratic thing. It is us, being consumers and financers at the same time, who make the rules of the game.
Think about it: Somebody issues an investment fund, which only invests in environmentally sound corporations (read: no stone age, just companies that care more for environmental issues than their competitors). Put enough money in this fund (as pension funds?), and _that_ will make a change. Sure enough, the return would be a bit lower than the usual PROFIT-fund, but it will make a change. The problem is, that too few people (read: you an me) would invest in such a fund.
Another thought on the consumers: The next time you buy a car (or anything else), don't look too closely at the price tag or the size, or the speed, but on fuel consumption. Guess what happens. Guess why US-built cars are incredibly hard to sell in Europe.
Why trust a (more or less) corrupt politician, when you can make the change on your own? The free market is very democratic...
Just my 0.02
Yes, you're right. But: Any corporation has responsibilities reaching beyond a monthly pay-check. (Disclaimer: I don't have the slightest idea about Coral current finacial situation. I suppose they're in big trouble..). One of these responsibilities is loyalty toward their employees (yes, this word is out of fashion). This is not only a social responsibility, since it can be applied vice-versa.
A company, any company, exists to provide a product or service that results in what most folks hope is a positive cash flow. If that is the result, it will grow. In that growth will certainly be newer jobs.As Naomi Campbell stated, when corporations show publicly that all they care about is money, then the employees will look at the whole employment-thing the same way. Funny enough, the highly educated people are still sought after (at least in Germany, J2EE-Specialists anyone?), and corporations ask for loyalty from their best employees, a plea which is no longer sustainable since everyone knows that a large number of corporations won't wait a second to fire you as soon as the shareholders feel that a company isn't making enough money anymore.
And hopefully stash away some money, since worse times are sure to come....
The reverse is also true. If a company has proven that it cannot make money, it will shrink. In it's shrinking, fewer employment opportunities exist.Well since they stowed away money in better times istead of paying immoraly high bonuses to anyone with a 'c' in his title or buying some almost bankrupt companies for growths sake, it is still possible to support a high number of employees until the economy improves.
No union, legislation, or any other happy thoughts can change this basic economic fact. When a company, like Corel, is no longer producing products that customers wish to buy, fewer jobs will result. How can you maintain staffing rates of old when you no longer have the cash to pay them?Loyalty goes a long way. An example I experienced in the company i used to work for: Like most companies in the IT-business, that company faced rough times. The only possibility to suvive was to cut costs, as usual cutting down wages. Instead of firing a lot of people, the wages were cut down by 10% for 'normal' employees, and up to 20% for better earning employees in management. No bonuses were paid.
First off, a "right" is not what someone does for you. A "right" is what the government can not do to you. Just as true in Canada as the US, or any other country for that matter. At most, something a government does for you could only be described as a "social program".Nobody was happy about that (having children, paying mortgages, etc. pp.), but at least the company still exists (I don't work for them anymore, but for different reasons). And yes, some layoffs followed later, but i really do think they were inevitable.
The point i'm trying to make is: There are many ways to save a corporation, massive layouts is the worst way.
No objections to this
From a german point of view, this discussion about beer is similar to people from Argentina and Brazil having about over which economy was better off....