Since the series hasn't started shooting yet, doesn't even have its first script or cast of characters yet, will certainly change its name before being broadcast, and exists as a single sheet of paper only, why is this news?
Now Boeing needs to take a lesson from AMD and cut prices on the 747. All the development costs should have been paid off well before now, and they can squeeze AirBus in the jumbo passenger jet market.
There was one particular track that I wanted to buy so I queried the sales folk as to the artist name and title. They had no idea and were not provided with any resource to fine out.
If you can remember 5 words of the lyrics, go to Google and search on: "quoted words" +lyrics. You should get pretty much only the song you want with even that few a number of words, as well as a list of various artists who have covered it.
Of course, your next step is to try-before-you-buy, to find the version you enjoy most. One of the magic things of P2P was finding covers of songs you liked by artists you'd never realized had produced them.
Songs are being traded at a rate about 17 times the iTunes Store's recent rate of sales.
Wow! I didn't realize that iTunes was selling that much.
More seriously, these press releases always blame filesharing. It's a boilerplate complaint every time CD sales go down. In fact, it would be Man-bites-Dog news to read, CD sales rise while filesharing rates decline.
What I think is happening is that there is a more informed consumer that doesn't buy the record industry's garbage any longer. Ever bought a CD that had only one track worth listening to? I have -- more than once. Or bought a song you only cared to listen to a dozen times, but you bought it anyway? I have -- more than once. How about a song you wouldn't have bought at all if you'd listened to it first?
The record industry used to sell you a take-it-or-leave-it bundle of songs at a price of their choosing. If it wasn't on an overpriced single (relative to the cost per song when bought by the album), you bought the whole album album. Consumer cassette recorders came along and mix tapes arrived soon after that. The record industry responded with the higher quality of the never-wears-out CD. It took 15 years for affordable CD burners and blank media to arrive before you could reproduce a CD containing only songs you wanted to hear. All this time the record industry was able to bundle in a bunch of B-sides or worse on your only other choice of albums.
Now, finally, consumers are thinking in terms of single tracks. Why? iTunes store sells them that way, iTunes on your computer rips CD's on a track basis, and iPods set playlists by track. The We'll-Decide-What's-Right-For-You albums are dead. The industry just doesn't know it yet. All its contracts with its artists are at the album level. The album will be completely dead when recording contracts specify a certain number of songs, rather than albums. And that's why sales are falling. Consumers want singles to mix and match as they please, and the became easily possible to get them for free via filesharing long before the record companies started selling them that way. The record companies are blind and stupid for not seeing, and reacting, to this when Napster first surfaced, and still haven't learned this lesson. As such, they are attempting to utilize fear (we'll sue you), guilt (think of the artists), the courts (we have sued you), and lawmakers (remember our senator from Disney?) to force you go consume your music their way -- which it not our way any longer.
They will lose, but do a lot of damage on the way down.
t is gratuitous for every story to highlight the adverse circumstances of a defendant, as if the unfortunate circumstances of that defendant is the dispositive feature of the case. Not every headline needs to be of the form: RIAA sues divorced mother...
The RIAA has their choice of whom they sue. The have the opportunity to investigate the circumstances of each case after their John Doe suit that they will drop (that's fraud on the Court, if anything is IMHO) once they have personally identifying information. They don't have to sue anybody. It's highly relevant therefore when they seek to sue poor, weak, and/or infirm. And there's no excuse for suing the dead. The RIAA could avoid these suits and focus on others, but have chosen not to do so. For this reason, this does need to be pointed out every time.
I would happily pay for all my music album downloads if I could choose my bit rate, the files were DRM free and the price was reasonable lower than the cost of a CD
This is what the industry does not want! Why? Digital is forever.
Vinyl wore out, warped in the hot car, suffered from freezing weather, and suffered much more from younger brother treating your record collection like a frisbee.
The industry sold you multiple copies of anything you really liked, followed by reel-to-reel versions, 8-track versions, cassette versions, and CD versions of the same d@mn music.
Then, when your CD's in your car were damaged, scratched, stolen, or otherwise rendered useless, they fought your ability to make legal backups so that they could continue selling you the same d@mn music over and over again.
Now with iPods and DRM'd digital downloads that only play on some or one portable player, they're still selling you the same d@mn music that you've purchased how many times before?
That's the problem with DRM-free digital music. Buy once and play everywhere forever.
The true crime in this case, btw, is not the judge finally saying you have to wave the white flag now, or go to court and die. The true crime is that it took two d@mn years to get to this point. It should have been tossed out fifteen minutes after it was filed in the first place! I predict option 3 -- a huge settlement offer to drop the case now rather than dismiss with prejudice, or go to court.
Take note, Microsoft has (to appearances, at least, while waiting to see if they provide everything necessary to compile up and run the current FP release) done something good here. Would that all other software companies follow suit with orphaned software.
You seem to have reached into your libertarian box for some boilerplate text, found something that doesn't apply well to this article and tossed it into a comment...In this case the market for Internet service isn't free.
You clearly did not understand what I was telling the poster, but prattled on as though you had. I was telling the poster that he might want to change the site hosting his webpage to an ISP not on the RBL. This would make his current hosting ISP more responsive to cleaning up some of the scum they're allowing on their system. This has nothing to do with your limited choice of at-home broadband providers, since you can host your web-site with providers all around the world, independent of who your own broadband provider is at the moment.
Yes, this has been another failure to communicate!
The entire lengthy submission doesn't mention "free speech" even once. Maybe you should at least read it before you critique.
The Poster is complaining that his website is being blocked because of its contents and as a result people with Internet connections are unable to receive his message. If you are incapable of understanding a Free Speech complaint that doesn't actually include the words "Free Speech" as a clue to the clueless, you should go back and sue whatever high school, college, and/or university graduated you.
And, btw, I did read the article, as I assume did you. What I'm wondering now is if you actually understood it?
What is the best Open Source file wiper, unused disc area scrubber? I remember when the latter function was actually part of Norton Utilities. Preference for Windows here.
Yes, and we just finished the worst hurricane season on record. How can NASA "confirm" anything? Confirming a prediction means it's still just a prediction.
Slashdot Mirror
The real question is, at what percent does breeding cease to be cross-breeding?
Sue your customers. Where have we heard that before?
Actually it's a turquoise screen, or maybe lapis lazuli, now.
Of course that's serial number 001 on the TI. After all, the purchaser of this is a serious Early Adopter.
Stupid.
Just a pointer for those with mod points tonight. I think he missed hitting the Microsoft Vista articla by a click or two.
If I were the artist of any of the specific songs they're accused of distributing, I'd be ashamed. Truly ashamed, at this.
Since the series hasn't started shooting yet, doesn't even have its first script or cast of characters yet, will certainly change its name before being broadcast, and exists as a single sheet of paper only, why is this news?
I'd like to see the same thing happen to the RIAA next.
Now Boeing needs to take a lesson from AMD and cut prices on the 747. All the development costs should have been paid off well before now, and they can squeeze AirBus in the jumbo passenger jet market.
That's about the value of my old computer, so why not just let it run BT while I game on the new machine? I've still got unused ports in the router.
Actually, you're not sorry at all.
this particular consumer doesn't want "mix and match" music.
You can always buy all the tracks then, and always listen to them in album order. What's your problem. That's just your way of making your playlists.
I like a nice shiny disc and some sleeve notes to read while I'm sat in front of a raging fire smoking my pipe and wearing my slippers...
You're not a download digital music consumer then, so why are you part of this discussion at all.
I Mod you SNOB -1.
Tell me about your Tube Amp, and I'll make it -2.
If you can remember 5 words of the lyrics, go to Google and search on: "quoted words" +lyrics. You should get pretty much only the song you want with even that few a number of words, as well as a list of various artists who have covered it.
Of course, your next step is to try-before-you-buy, to find the version you enjoy most. One of the magic things of P2P was finding covers of songs you liked by artists you'd never realized had produced them.
Wow! I didn't realize that iTunes was selling that much.
More seriously, these press releases always blame filesharing. It's a boilerplate complaint every time CD sales go down. In fact, it would be Man-bites-Dog news to read, CD sales rise while filesharing rates decline.
What I think is happening is that there is a more informed consumer that doesn't buy the record industry's garbage any longer. Ever bought a CD that had only one track worth listening to? I have -- more than once. Or bought a song you only cared to listen to a dozen times, but you bought it anyway? I have -- more than once. How about a song you wouldn't have bought at all if you'd listened to it first?
The record industry used to sell you a take-it-or-leave-it bundle of songs at a price of their choosing. If it wasn't on an overpriced single (relative to the cost per song when bought by the album), you bought the whole album album. Consumer cassette recorders came along and mix tapes arrived soon after that. The record industry responded with the higher quality of the never-wears-out CD. It took 15 years for affordable CD burners and blank media to arrive before you could reproduce a CD containing only songs you wanted to hear. All this time the record industry was able to bundle in a bunch of B-sides or worse on your only other choice of albums.
Now, finally, consumers are thinking in terms of single tracks. Why? iTunes store sells them that way, iTunes on your computer rips CD's on a track basis, and iPods set playlists by track. The We'll-Decide-What's-Right-For-You albums are dead. The industry just doesn't know it yet. All its contracts with its artists are at the album level. The album will be completely dead when recording contracts specify a certain number of songs, rather than albums. And that's why sales are falling. Consumers want singles to mix and match as they please, and the became easily possible to get them for free via filesharing long before the record companies started selling them that way. The record companies are blind and stupid for not seeing, and reacting, to this when Napster first surfaced, and still haven't learned this lesson. As such, they are attempting to utilize fear (we'll sue you), guilt (think of the artists), the courts (we have sued you), and lawmakers (remember our senator from Disney?) to force you go consume your music their way -- which it not our way any longer.
They will lose, but do a lot of damage on the way down.
The RIAA has their choice of whom they sue. The have the opportunity to investigate the circumstances of each case after their John Doe suit that they will drop (that's fraud on the Court, if anything is IMHO) once they have personally identifying information. They don't have to sue anybody. It's highly relevant therefore when they seek to sue poor, weak, and/or infirm. And there's no excuse for suing the dead. The RIAA could avoid these suits and focus on others, but have chosen not to do so. For this reason, this does need to be pointed out every time.
This is what the industry does not want! Why? Digital is forever.
Vinyl wore out, warped in the hot car, suffered from freezing weather, and suffered much more from younger brother treating your record collection like a frisbee.
The industry sold you multiple copies of anything you really liked, followed by reel-to-reel versions, 8-track versions, cassette versions, and CD versions of the same d@mn music.
Then, when your CD's in your car were damaged, scratched, stolen, or otherwise rendered useless, they fought your ability to make legal backups so that they could continue selling you the same d@mn music over and over again.
Now with iPods and DRM'd digital downloads that only play on some or one portable player, they're still selling you the same d@mn music that you've purchased how many times before?
That's the problem with DRM-free digital music. Buy once and play everywhere forever.
The true crime in this case, btw, is not the judge finally saying you have to wave the white flag now, or go to court and die. The true crime is that it took two d@mn years to get to this point. It should have been tossed out fifteen minutes after it was filed in the first place! I predict option 3 -- a huge settlement offer to drop the case now rather than dismiss with prejudice, or go to court.
This might have been news 3 years ago.
Take note, Microsoft has (to appearances, at least, while waiting to see if they provide everything necessary to compile up and run the current FP release) done something good here. Would that all other software companies follow suit with orphaned software.
You clearly did not understand what I was telling the poster, but prattled on as though you had. I was telling the poster that he might want to change the site hosting his webpage to an ISP not on the RBL. This would make his current hosting ISP more responsive to cleaning up some of the scum they're allowing on their system. This has nothing to do with your limited choice of at-home broadband providers, since you can host your web-site with providers all around the world, independent of who your own broadband provider is at the moment.
Yes, this has been another failure to communicate!
The Poster is complaining that his website is being blocked because of its contents and as a result people with Internet connections are unable to receive his message. If you are incapable of understanding a Free Speech complaint that doesn't actually include the words "Free Speech" as a clue to the clueless, you should go back and sue whatever high school, college, and/or university graduated you.
And, btw, I did read the article, as I assume did you. What I'm wondering now is if you actually understood it?
Oh, so they're spying on the hard drives of their students now. Bad University! Bad! Have you been taking lessons from the RIAA?
What is the best Open Source file wiper, unused disc area scrubber? I remember when the latter function was actually part of Norton Utilities. Preference for Windows here.
Yes, and we just finished the worst hurricane season on record. How can NASA "confirm" anything? Confirming a prediction means it's still just a prediction.
Mod parent up:
CONCISE +1
PITHY +1.