Have you heard much about the use (or possible use) of micropayments by artists or labels for users to download directly off an artist site? It seems to me that this would allow the artist to gain more financial and creative control as well as allow the consumer to make a much more reasonably priced purchase.
A download system that benefits the artists more via micropayments, and I mean less than the $1 or so AppleTunes charges, can end this nonsense about getting around RIAA and so on. Anyone not willing to pay no more and probably less than $0.50 for a single is a jerk who probably deserves to have their hard drive invaded.
Of course this would not apply to recordings to artists currently under contract, but so be it. (Those contracted artists who complain about losing money are idiots. They signed that opportunity away long and should shut up).
Ideas like Cringely's sound good on the surface but seem to be nothing more than instigating rock throwing fights with the RIAA and other idiots (politicians, some artists, etc) who share their philosophy. Let's move forward.
Every idea or discussion I hear seems to always forget about the artist.
So under this plan, if an independent artist (pays their own recording, cd pressing, etc) has their disc bought for $14, is lucky enough that just one single is downloaded 100,000 times at $0.05/download, then $5,000.00 is made and then artist only receives (maybe) profit off of a $14 sale. If that is not motivation for artists to side with the RIAA I don't know what could do it.
Aargh: I meant to say "my way" and when I first tried to reply I got:
"Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
It's been 17 seconds since you hit 'reply'!
Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator."
Besides just uninstalling that software, there are some things you could and should do.
Check to see if your local city government has a liasion with the cable company. If so, my first step would be to let them know about what you experienced.
As someone else mentioned, check the service contract to see what it mentions about allowing the cable company to make you a party to other agreements (EULA). Though it could happen, I doubt a court would allow it to stand if you were unaware of what the agreements were about. It would be the same as assigning the power of attorney.
The idea of needing a demographic database to offset costs could be true but should have been stated. Companies should offer the customer a choice: pay x amount for the product or pay a smaller fee but allow them to gather and use marketing info.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you heard much about the use (or possible use) of micropayments by artists or labels for users to download directly off an artist site? It seems to me that this would allow the artist to gain more financial and creative control as well as allow the consumer to make a much more reasonably priced purchase.
A download system that benefits the artists more via micropayments, and I mean less than the $1 or so AppleTunes charges, can end this nonsense about getting around RIAA and so on. Anyone not willing to pay no more and probably less than $0.50 for a single is a jerk who probably deserves to have their hard drive invaded.
Of course this would not apply to recordings to artists currently under contract, but so be it. (Those contracted artists who complain about losing money are idiots. They signed that opportunity away long and should shut up).
Ideas like Cringely's sound good on the surface but seem to be nothing more than instigating rock throwing fights with the RIAA and other idiots (politicians, some artists, etc) who share their philosophy. Let's move forward.
Every idea or discussion I hear seems to always forget about the artist.
So under this plan, if an independent artist (pays their own recording, cd pressing, etc) has their disc bought for $14, is lucky enough that just one single is downloaded 100,000 times at $0.05/download, then $5,000.00 is made and then artist only receives (maybe) profit off of a $14 sale. If that is not motivation for artists to side with the RIAA I don't know what could do it.
http://www.intranetjournal.com/
i j_ 05_21_03a.html
i j_ 05_15_03a.html
http://www.intranetjournal.com/articles/200305/
http://www.intranetjournal.com/articles/200305/
See: http://www.dvdrhelp.com/ http://www.videoguys.com (retailer but has great guides and forum) http://www.radified.com (guides to alot of stuff)
Aargh: I meant to say "my way" and when I first tried to reply I got: "Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment. It's been 17 seconds since you hit 'reply'! Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator."
I can find my back to this tomorrow :)
Visit the following:
:)
www.prorec.com (good articles and great discussion area)
www.digifreq.com (good discussion boards and also ran by Scott Garrigus who has written some good audio/computer recording books)
Welcome to a new layer of hell
James
Let them request the prices not be displayed...we can join the do not shop campaign: http://adbusters.org/campaigns/bnd/
Besides just uninstalling that software, there are some things you could and should do. Check to see if your local city government has a liasion with the cable company. If so, my first step would be to let them know about what you experienced. As someone else mentioned, check the service contract to see what it mentions about allowing the cable company to make you a party to other agreements (EULA). Though it could happen, I doubt a court would allow it to stand if you were unaware of what the agreements were about. It would be the same as assigning the power of attorney. The idea of needing a demographic database to offset costs could be true but should have been stated. Companies should offer the customer a choice: pay x amount for the product or pay a smaller fee but allow them to gather and use marketing info.