They can continue to blame piracy if they want. Blame piracy for what? The last figures I saw show
You're joking right?
You have been reading the articles about the cases RIAA has been brining to court? They blame their loss of sales to piracy. They even like to put a price tag to it. Everything is pretty general and loose of lip though, coming from them. Anyway, I am just saying what they. What you mention is what we say.
Don't go assuming that you own the IP recorded on the CD, though. You only bought the right to access it.
I don't have the right to access it from a CD-ROM drive anymore, do I?
You've been granted access, it's your item now. The RFID is no longer a part of the store's access control device and the DMCA can no longer apply.
I agree that in theory, this is what is suppose to happen. However, it has already been mentioned that some encryption might be necessary. Such as RFID's used in cards. Or to keep people from scanning large inventories from a distance, etc. Put anything like that in there, and disabling it is going to be "illegal" somehow. Or learning how to disable it.
In fact, I know that they want to push this item very badly. And once it's out there, I have a feeling the usage of it will mutate, and companies will *not* want this information disabled. An example would be how spam/marketing/mail lists/demographics has gone crazy in today's world. Companies want to make money off of databases and mine those databases. RFID's living forever == more database opportunities.
It also seems to be about the only thing we can easily do that is still lawful.
I wasn't buying CD's before Napster, and it was because they were too expensive. My entertainment dollar hasn't grown, it has to be shared with other marketplaces. DVD's and Computer Games have gotten the majority of my entertainment dollar, and according to statistics, those markets have grown VERY high recently. This point is never brought up when the RIAA is claiming piracy as the cause of their slips in sales.
They can continue to blame piracy if they want. But there's got to be a point in time when their numbers don't add up, even to paid-off politicians. As long as they keep crippling their CD's, produce less choices, and start suing their customers, their sales will really start to slip, with or without piracy.
I'm afraid I don't follow you on your Rage Against the Machine example. Most of their albums have been through Epic/Sony.
Another example I forgot to mention was College Radio. We need a ClearChannel alternative.
What is sad is that this great organization you described is what the RIAA is suppose to be.
Although I dislike some of the actions the MPAA has done, I'd have to say that the actors of the world seem much better off than the musicians of the world. It seems like they have a true Union in place, (Screenactors guild?) and I agree with you that I'd like to see the same thing happen for the musicians.
At a minimum, it would be nice to see a pension plan consist of the copyrights reverting back to the musician. Instead of death + 75 years or whatever.
You make all the correct intelligent points. And as a collector, I won't act the fool, as you say, and justify my reasons for downloading mp3's.
However, I disagree with a company believing they have a god given right to profits, even in a recession, and buying our government off just to keep themselves in business. I disagree that I should go to jail longer than a drug dealer and a pimp for the actions I'm doing, and become bankrupt through their barratry. I would literally be better off shoplifting all the albums.
And of course there's the little things, like their media FUD of pointing at me calling me a little thief, me killing an industry, and me starving the artist, when they have already been convicted of price fixing, ripping off the consumers, delaying technologoy, and ruining the financial lives of more artists than I will ever have a chance to.
I agree with most of what you say, but there is a reason that the RIAA is holding a tight fist on their complete monopoly of marketing/distribution/merch. And that's because they know they need to control all of it to stay a monopoly.
I think your only flaw in all your good points is that the indy scene could (SHOULD) be the ones busting this through.
We need another Nirvana doing perfectly well selling CD's without the RIAA to come along and stick with Indy all the way. More Ani DiFranco's and the like. A new CMJ magazine that hasn't sold out.
I think the lawsuits in August are going to work against the RIAA. They are cresting a hill in consumer awareness that is starting to hit closer to Joe sixpack, and they aren't happy. They don't know what to do about it, and the normal slashsnot is only all talk, but more and more are doing something about it, and it will only pick up speed. I think the August lawsuits will be that catalyst.
Heheheh, my thoughts exactly. Although I don't know *what* you'd call them. I'd rather be a bloodsucking vampire.
Re:Jumping in on the discussion early.
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 1
More characters? Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? I ask, simply because this series was maxing out my ability to keep everyone straight.
I don't mean the main 40 characters, that was easy due to Martin's amazing character development. But I printed a 11"x17" map and put it on the wall so I would quit flipping to the front and back pages to look at the maps to see where City X was and Island Y. Also the houses were hard to remember when minor characters were being brought up (like the differences between House Tyrell vs. Highgarden, etc)
If the new medium will make them money, they'll want to make use of it.
I think the problem is, is that it won't make them money. Sure, to you and me, the $5 million dollar mark from iTunes is a lot of money. But to them, it looks like a drop in the bucket. A long ways to go to get to $5 billion dollars.
I have watched the mp3 phenomenon very closely over the last 5 years, and I have to say that without a doubt... They would rather make all of the $5 billion dollars, than make 50% of a $14 billion dollar market. For some reason, they want absolute complete control of the market. I can only guess that it is because they feel safer controlling all aspects of the monopoly. And I suppose it's been working quite well for the last half century, so who am I to argue their motives.
Their past "attempts" to please customers in the digital medium:
SDMI.
Sue Diamond because of their mp3 player.
Sue mp3.com because they tried to provide a streaming service.
Destroy Napster
Sue all P2P softwares
Make everyone pay a CD-R tax.
Attempting to add $500 tax to hard drives in Canada
Liquid Audio???
Crippled CD's
Extra content on CD's: Download 2 songs for free! Wowwy.
Turn in your friend: 1-800 hotline number
Lots of $$$ donated to politicians
NET act passed
Fair use rights revoked
DMCA passed
Busted for price fixing
Singers are now work-for-hire, never own the copyright
Copyrights extended forever
More legislation being bought
Call me cynical, but that list shows that they've been busy, with cash and money, to crush the digital technology, and take down anyone in the way.
Personally, I can't argue on the side of pirating music. But I don't think I should go to jail longer than a drug deale,r and fined more than the folks responsible for Enron and go into bankrupcy. It's out of hand. The world shouldn't have technology slowed down because one business doesn't feel like it's profitable to them. A business is not guaranteed by the government to be profitable. Especially in a recession. History has shown the government stepping in for certain key markets that they deemed worthy for national safety: Steel workers, Farmers, Oil, Transportation, Communication, etc.
Music? Sorry, but it's the money talking at the Hill.
You won't be saying that when the RIAA kick in your doors at gunpoint with a SWAT team because you are accused of serving up copyrighted material on Kazaa.
But it wasn't me, it must have been my neigbors....
The evidence so far is that the recording industry is prepared to experiment with electronic music formats and systems. This is how systems such as the iTunes Music Store have come into being
Totally weak.
How many years would we have had to wait for these electronic music formats and system if Napster never came into being? NEVER.
And even now, they are still quoting the same B.S. they quotes back in '98. "We are actively researching online blah blah blah to get music to our customers in the way they want blah blah blah"
5 years and counting. They have OVER a $100 million dollar budget just for their in-house legal department. And they still are dragging their feet on a viable online solution. A real one. Not iTunes crap.
It took a broke college kid only one semester to copy Napster from a sleeping Seth Green. The Music Cartel...just...doesn't...want...to.
They completely control all aspects of their distribution now, why would they ever want to take a cut in their 5 billion dollar monopoly to spread into a new medium?
Sorry, you need to read up on the NET ACT of '97 that Clinton signed. It further defines the definition of selling/leasing/assigning.
Basically if you receive other copyrighted files in exchange of your copyrighted files, that is considered "profit".
I know this doesn't tie exactly to your example, but there are plenty of laws out there to read, and YOU WILL FIND that you are not allowed to distribute a copyrighted works without express permission from the copyright owner. And ignorance of the law is no defense, unfortunately.
Except for the fact that there's about 200 million copies of kazaa out there, which is indeed a large percentage of their customers.
They are not exclusive. If you were talking about irc and newsgroups, I would tend to agree. But Kazaa is way too popular and mainstream.
And I disagree about the shiplifter in Walmart analogy. No one shoplifts ALL of their consumables. They shoplift a fraction of what they buy, thus they are also customers of walmart.
As far as giving a reverse argument to your stats, I'd like to point out that one of Eminem's albums had been available on Napster a full month before it hit the stores. Did this mean his albums didn't sell? No, it had a world record first-week sales of all time. I think there is plenty of positive data the RIAA is purposely ignoring because the only thing they are REALLY interested in is keeping the monopoly on all aspects of the industry: Content, artists (works for hire), distribution, marketing, airwaves, media, everything.
Yep. In the case of the record industry, you can almost think of 'price fixing' as being a license they paid for:
For only (a one time fee of) $300? million dollars, you are allowed to make 1 billion dollars extra per year.
Plus, what proof is there that it has stopped? I think merging with each other into one monopoly is a thin veil to cover up price fixing. Now they can price fix legally?
I remember reading the estimated cost per song... but don't remember what it was. It was significantly more than $1, though!! (It was a large fraction of the album cost)
Not to mention they would probably say 1 Pink Floyd song equaled the equivalent of 3 songs....
Slashdot Mirror
You're joking right?
You have been reading the articles about the cases RIAA has been brining to court? They blame their loss of sales to piracy. They even like to put a price tag to it. Everything is pretty general and loose of lip though, coming from them. Anyway, I am just saying what they. What you mention is what we say.
Don't go assuming that you own the IP recorded on the CD, though. You only bought the right to access it.
I don't have the right to access it from a CD-ROM drive anymore, do I?
You've been granted access, it's your item now. The RFID is no longer a part of the store's access control device and the DMCA can no longer apply.
I agree that in theory, this is what is suppose to happen. However, it has already been mentioned that some encryption might be necessary. Such as RFID's used in cards. Or to keep people from scanning large inventories from a distance, etc. Put anything like that in there, and disabling it is going to be "illegal" somehow. Or learning how to disable it.
In fact, I know that they want to push this item very badly. And once it's out there, I have a feeling the usage of it will mutate, and companies will *not* want this information disabled. An example would be how spam/marketing/mail lists/demographics has gone crazy in today's world. Companies want to make money off of databases and mine those databases. RFID's living forever == more database opportunities.
Are you saying I already gained access to the item (CD) when I bought it (CD?) Thus it no longer controls (RIAA) access to it?
It also seems to be about the only thing we can easily do that is still lawful.
I wasn't buying CD's before Napster, and it was because they were too expensive. My entertainment dollar hasn't grown, it has to be shared with other marketplaces. DVD's and Computer Games have gotten the majority of my entertainment dollar, and according to statistics, those markets have grown VERY high recently. This point is never brought up when the RIAA is claiming piracy as the cause of their slips in sales.
They can continue to blame piracy if they want. But there's got to be a point in time when their numbers don't add up, even to paid-off politicians. As long as they keep crippling their CD's, produce less choices, and start suing their customers, their sales will really start to slip, with or without piracy.
I'm afraid I don't follow you on your Rage Against the Machine example. Most of their albums have been through Epic/Sony.
Another example I forgot to mention was College Radio. We need a ClearChannel alternative.
Although I dislike some of the actions the MPAA has done, I'd have to say that the actors of the world seem much better off than the musicians of the world. It seems like they have a true Union in place, (Screenactors guild?) and I agree with you that I'd like to see the same thing happen for the musicians.
At a minimum, it would be nice to see a pension plan consist of the copyrights reverting back to the musician. Instead of death + 75 years or whatever.
However, I disagree with a company believing they have a god given right to profits, even in a recession, and buying our government off just to keep themselves in business. I disagree that I should go to jail longer than a drug dealer and a pimp for the actions I'm doing, and become bankrupt through their barratry. I would literally be better off shoplifting all the albums.
And of course there's the little things, like their media FUD of pointing at me calling me a little thief, me killing an industry, and me starving the artist, when they have already been convicted of price fixing, ripping off the consumers, delaying technologoy, and ruining the financial lives of more artists than I will ever have a chance to.
I think your only flaw in all your good points is that the indy scene could (SHOULD) be the ones busting this through.
We need another Nirvana doing perfectly well selling CD's without the RIAA to come along and stick with Indy all the way. More Ani DiFranco's and the like. A new CMJ magazine that hasn't sold out.
I think the lawsuits in August are going to work against the RIAA. They are cresting a hill in consumer awareness that is starting to hit closer to Joe sixpack, and they aren't happy. They don't know what to do about it, and the normal slashsnot is only all talk, but more and more are doing something about it, and it will only pick up speed. I think the August lawsuits will be that catalyst.
Damn, that's the longest "I could give a shit" post I've seen all month.
Just get married. Now you don't get to drink Guiness OR Bud.
The employees took the time to put little cards up next to a bunch of books.... "Hugo award winner 2002"... "Nominee".... etc.
This particular series had a card up that said: "Best Fantasy book ever". Read some reviews, then picked them up. Great read.
Heheheh, my thoughts exactly. Although I don't know *what* you'd call them. I'd rather be a bloodsucking vampire.
I don't mean the main 40 characters, that was easy due to Martin's amazing character development. But I printed a 11"x17" map and put it on the wall so I would quit flipping to the front and back pages to look at the maps to see where City X was and Island Y. Also the houses were hard to remember when minor characters were being brought up (like the differences between House Tyrell vs. Highgarden, etc)
I think the problem is, is that it won't make them money. Sure, to you and me, the $5 million dollar mark from iTunes is a lot of money. But to them, it looks like a drop in the bucket. A long ways to go to get to $5 billion dollars.
I have watched the mp3 phenomenon very closely over the last 5 years, and I have to say that without a doubt... They would rather make all of the $5 billion dollars, than make 50% of a $14 billion dollar market. For some reason, they want absolute complete control of the market. I can only guess that it is because they feel safer controlling all aspects of the monopoly. And I suppose it's been working quite well for the last half century, so who am I to argue their motives.
Their past "attempts" to please customers in the digital medium:
SDMI.
Sue Diamond because of their mp3 player.
Sue mp3.com because they tried to provide a streaming service.
Destroy Napster
Sue all P2P softwares
Make everyone pay a CD-R tax.
Attempting to add $500 tax to hard drives in Canada
Liquid Audio???
Crippled CD's
Extra content on CD's: Download 2 songs for free! Wowwy.
Turn in your friend: 1-800 hotline number
Lots of $$$ donated to politicians
NET act passed
Fair use rights revoked
DMCA passed
Busted for price fixing
Singers are now work-for-hire, never own the copyright
Copyrights extended forever
More legislation being bought
Call me cynical, but that list shows that they've been busy, with cash and money, to crush the digital technology, and take down anyone in the way.
Personally, I can't argue on the side of pirating music. But I don't think I should go to jail longer than a drug deale,r and fined more than the folks responsible for Enron and go into bankrupcy. It's out of hand. The world shouldn't have technology slowed down because one business doesn't feel like it's profitable to them. A business is not guaranteed by the government to be profitable. Especially in a recession. History has shown the government stepping in for certain key markets that they deemed worthy for national safety: Steel workers, Farmers, Oil, Transportation, Communication, etc.
Music? Sorry, but it's the money talking at the Hill.
But it wasn't me, it must have been my neigbors....
Totally weak.
How many years would we have had to wait for these electronic music formats and system if Napster never came into being? NEVER.
And even now, they are still quoting the same B.S. they quotes back in '98. "We are actively researching online blah blah blah to get music to our customers in the way they want blah blah blah"
5 years and counting. They have OVER a $100 million dollar budget just for their in-house legal department. And they still are dragging their feet on a viable online solution. A real one. Not iTunes crap.
It took a broke college kid only one semester to copy Napster from a sleeping Seth Green. The Music Cartel...just...doesn't...want...to.
They completely control all aspects of their distribution now, why would they ever want to take a cut in their 5 billion dollar monopoly to spread into a new medium?
I don't get it. Is he looking for the matrix or something?
do you get caffine from coffe?
You know, they make cheap PCI cards with FM/AM receivers on them. Software bundled, so you can record to wav/mp3.
Basically if you receive other copyrighted files in exchange of your copyrighted files, that is considered "profit".
I know this doesn't tie exactly to your example, but there are plenty of laws out there to read, and YOU WILL FIND that you are not allowed to distribute a copyrighted works without express permission from the copyright owner. And ignorance of the law is no defense, unfortunately.
They are not exclusive. If you were talking about irc and newsgroups, I would tend to agree. But Kazaa is way too popular and mainstream.
And I disagree about the shiplifter in Walmart analogy. No one shoplifts ALL of their consumables. They shoplift a fraction of what they buy, thus they are also customers of walmart.
As far as giving a reverse argument to your stats, I'd like to point out that one of Eminem's albums had been available on Napster a full month before it hit the stores. Did this mean his albums didn't sell? No, it had a world record first-week sales of all time. I think there is plenty of positive data the RIAA is purposely ignoring because the only thing they are REALLY interested in is keeping the monopoly on all aspects of the industry: Content, artists (works for hire), distribution, marketing, airwaves, media, everything.
For only (a one time fee of) $300? million dollars, you are allowed to make 1 billion dollars extra per year.
Plus, what proof is there that it has stopped? I think merging with each other into one monopoly is a thin veil to cover up price fixing. Now they can price fix legally?
It's actually a very very small percentage of the profits they made due to the pirce fixing. Now large would be the student's life savings of $12,000.
Woah... you know all of them?
Not to mention they would probably say 1 Pink Floyd song equaled the equivalent of 3 songs....
Whenever I go for porn, I get Britney Spears.