Oh man, Lucas finally releases the original trilogy on DVD, AOL starts at least trying to have some form of security both in the same day. That has got to be a major sign of the impending apocalypse. If Microsoft announces it's dropping Windows to develop Linux before the day's out I'm heading for the mountains!
and then not releasing the original versions that many people want to buy.
If there really is a huge piracy problem for the original trilogy then this is the reason why. People have been begging, screaming, whining and complaining about the lack of a DVD release of the original trilogy at least since Episode I came out on DVD. That's been about 4 years now so of course people are going to start turning to alternatives. I'd be willing to bet a large amount of those "pirating" the original trilogy own the VHS version and have already preordered the DVD boxset.
Personally I have the only digital version released up till now -- the laserdisc version. Still I'm not keen on the two pauses you have to deal with per movie (one double-sided disc, one single sided per movie) so I preordered the box set. There's not a huge number of people with laserdisc players (even at the height of their popularity, such as it was) much less both a player and the Star Wars LDs, everyone else wanting a digital version has been SOL up till today.
While that doesn't really make it right that people have pirated it, I'm not going to be feeling sorry for Lucas. Quite frankly, he brought that particular piracy mess on himself by being stubborn and ignoring fan requests. He'll still make barrel loads of money off the DVD boxset anyway so it's not like he's going to suffer. Neither are those that worked on the original trilogy, he did share profits with the cast and crew on The Empire Strikes Back at least, I believe he did so on Return of the Jedi as well. (For those buying the boxset the new documentary included will tell the details, I caught it on A&E a few weeks back.) About the only "victims" I can see for piracy of the original trilogy would be the stores who didn't have the product to sell in the first place.
And frankly it'd sell well even if he'd made us wait as long as he originally intended, although he may have lost all remaining fan goodwill towards him.
Humans have never devised a way to kill viruses once inside the body.
Not true, there are anti-viral drugs. There's one used to treat Shingles as well as other diseases caused by the same virus called Famvir. In that case it can't get rid of all of them but if taken within 76 hours of an outbreak of Shingles it can help greatly is reducing the length of the outbreak and subsequent pain. I'm sure there are others as well.
What you're thinking is that we can't create a drug that is broad-spectrum in attacking multiple viruses like many antibiotics are. The odds are against that happening due to the huge variances in viruses. At least most bacteria have some common grounds to attack, like their protective shells.
I haven't seen anything in Induce about the abolishment of unencrypted CDs...
And I didn't say it did, I said that was their ultimate goals. It'll happen in another bill introducted later on.
Are you really going to tell me that members of Congress would step aside and let the RIAA kill a technology - audio CDs - that *almost every single one* of their constituents use?
How many millions of people use P2P apps in the US? Congress is not only stepping aside, they're helping the RIAA get legislation passed that will criminalize a lot of P2P apps. The wording is still so vague that it'll be too risky for companies to continue to offer them. So yes they'd be more than happy to do so, they're already doing it with another technology.
Digital television broadcasting, with all analog broadcasts off the air by 2003? Meaning everyone has to buy a thousand-plus dollar television or get cable?
Perhaps you've not followed that issue very closely, it's still going to occur, you'll have to buy a new TV or a down converter although cable companies may down convert for their non-HD subscribers. They've only pushed back the date for stations to stop broadcasting in analog, not stopped it.
They're really going to do that again, with people having to buy new CD players that will not play unencrypted discs... come on.
It's not too far of a stretch, when's the last time your congressperson seemed to defend your interests and not the industries lobbying them and donating to them? They passed the DMCA and everyone hates it but they aren't willing to pass new laws to restore consumer rights it took away. They're moving full steam ahead on the Induce act, both parties in fact, and I know of no one outside of the Music and Movie industries that think it's a good idea, much less want it to be passed. They haven't listened to us in the past, aren't in the present so why would they in the future?
That's impossible, you could get 2 pc's together and use the line out/in sockets. How are they going to know the audio stream is copyright once it has left it's digital form?
Technologically that would be audio watermarking but I suspect it'll just be simpler for them to get things to where it's assumed that the audio stream is always copyrighted. You'll have to buy special software/hardware to record your own stuff, even if you do own it.
The point isn't to make it impossible to copy... the point is to make it past the point of diminishing returns. If you have to work too hard to do it, most people will just give up and/or buy the media. Which is what they want.
No they want to make sure it's not possible for anyone to rip it by any means necessary. They've already figured out that you can't put the genie back in the bottle so they want to make sure it can't get out onto the Internet for download. I do believe they've finally figured out that a technological solution to 100% blocking music ripping is impossible so they'll go with a multi-pronged approach:
Make sure no unprotected discs can go on the market. This will be accomplished both by legal means and collusion between studios to halt the production of unprotected discs. Existing unsold discs in the market will be recalled and quite likely destroyed.
Make it a crime to break the protection on the new products. The penalties for breaking this law will likely end up being more severe than for more serious crimes such as rape, murder or even drug offenses.
Make it a crime to create or use P2P networks. They know it's not going to work to try to stop just music being traded on them so they have to get them outlawed completely. The Induce act is the first step in this process. (I seriously doubt it's the last, there will be more that will make the Induce act look tame.)
Go after other distribution channels, Usenet providers are likely to start seeing lawsuits from the RIAA. I predict within 2 years the first Usenet provider will be sued with the claim that they're liable for everything that crosses Usenet.
What's left? IRC and IM. This will be the next step. They'll probably save this until they have unprotected CDs outlawed, this will allow them to work on legislation to require all messaging apps to include code to inspect a file for watermarks and refuse to transfer it if it has them.
Go after anything new that pops up in the interim.
I know it sounds fairly paranoid but their current history of bills they've gotten passed or attempted to pass support this. It's a fairly logical extension to it all. The recording industry has already displayed a willingness to lose the CD logo on discs so that they can put copy protection on them. They're also willing to sue and destroy their own customers (how many lawsuits have been filed against downloaders now?). They've proven they are not willing to compromise on this, they want it their way and their way is that everyone pays. They also want to make you pay again to use the music you buy in other formats, look at their DRM restrictions so far.
So how does my home entertainment center read the discs? Do you suppose they will mandate that every consumer must purchase new cd-playback devices to be compatable?
Existing devices would be able to play existing non-encrypted discs and you'd be SOL for the new protected stuff. Frankly the way they've been going I do believe they want to mandate the purchase of new hardware in order to get new music. That way they can avoid (in their minds at least) all the problems with that pesky pre-existing equipment.
How do they phase this in? The hit on the industry would be disasterous and then after that hit, the encryption will be cracked...
I doubt they want a phase-in period, they want a cold turkey switch. Yes the encryption will be cracked but they'll make sure it's a crime to both crack it and use that information to extract the audio. (In fact it probably already is under the DMCA.) In their world view you either pay up for new equipment and their overpriced music (aka crap), do without or rot in jail for the horrid crime of wanting to exercise what used to be known as fair use rights. (Those will be legislated away of course.)
so who loses? The recording industry and the consumers..
Bingo! But we already have proof that the recording industry is blind to this fact. All the lawsuits are not helping the industry. Online "piracy" is as rampant as ever, sales of CDs continue to decline and even the major success story of online music sales iTunes isn't making a dent in the drop of sales. The recording industry is driven by one sole thing -- greed. Everything to them is how best to profit from whatever they do. This is blinding them to reality and everything that causes sales to drop is someone else's fault, never theirs. This is going to continue until, well, until the existing recording industry no longer exists.
I suspect a lot of people are going to say that I'm just being paranoid here but if you look at the bills the recording industry has gotten introduced over the years together they are heading for exactly for what I'm saying. Congress has proven unwilling to listen to their constituents on this matter, just look at the broad bi-partisan backing of the Induce act! Anyone that's told about it just stares at you and the response is generally "how can they do that?" (in regards to what the Induce act hopes to do to P2P makers). Yet congress is going full steam ahead to passing it. Right now it looks like it's not a matter of if the Induce act will be passed, it's a matter of WHEN. Once it's law then there will be more bills, one at a time, gradually pushing towards that utopic future (for the recording industry anyway) where it's illegal to make an unprotected CD and quite likely it will be illegal to make CD players that can play the old unprotected ones as well.
The CDs are still going to have regular audio tracks, so they can play in regular CD players. Longhorn will still read regular audio tracks, so it can still play old CDs that don't have a DRMed copy of their content. Even if Longhorn checks for a mixed-mode CD and restricts access to the music portion, that breaks older mixed-mode CDs that have the music on the audio portion only, and other content on the data portion. Bottom line, it sounds to me like I'll still be able to just hold shift.
Right now this is true but given the efforts the RIAA has been making with getting laws passed in the US by the time Longhorn comes out it may not be LEGAL to include a regular unencrypted audio track on a CD any more. While consumers and home audio companies would be livid about this, Congress and the RIAA seem to think ideas like that are just grand. Look at the DMCA and the proposed Induce act for examples.
There is always another way to rip the audio from CDs. So Microsoft builds copy protection into their OS. Who cares. It wont stop me from making backups of my CDs.
It could actually, or at least make it extremely difficult. The article says it's not clear what method Microsoft is pushing but it could be the "Secure Audio Path" concept (which would protect content all the way to a computer's speakers, making it impossible to make digital copies by recording from the soundcard). In that case Microsoft would likely mandate hardware changes or hardware wouldn't be certified as usable with Longhorn or simply Longhorn would refuse to accept it. Even if you use Linux if all the hardware you get enforces the copy protection in the hardware it's going to make it really difficult to rip the audio from those CDs.
What I found most interesting about the article was this little blurb from near the end:
Many independent labels are rumoured to be terrified by the proposal, our sources suggest, which could grant Microsoft the mandate on CD copy protection and, if it is accepted by the industry, potentially increase the costs of CD production.
While here on/. we take it for granted that cries of Microsoft's trying to take over/muscle into a new market/etc. will occur but this is the first time I've heard of a company from well outside the computer industry voicing similar concerns. If this happens and their fears are realized Microsoft would effectively be able to leverage their OS monopoly into practically owning an entirely new industry for them -- the music industry.
I don't know about you but that thought's pretty scary. I don't like copy protection at all (I bought the damn thing, I want to do what I want to with it, and no that doesn't include sharing it illegally) if it's going to happen I don't think Microsoft is a trustworthy steward to have in control of it. Based on their past actions the whole music industry would probably get worse than the current corrupt and abusive (to artists and fans) system.
To hell with vendors that treat long-term customers like criminals. I had purchased, used, upgraded and recommended the offending publisher's products since 1991.
I had a situation a few years back where I lost all of my computers and backups quite unexpectedly and had to rebuild. I use a particular E-mail program that's quite good and secure and has tons of features that I find quite useful (it even goes way beyond what I'll ever need). I bought a copy of it several years back, and at the time I had to choose a passcode that, I was told, would be used to regenerate my registration code if it was ever lost. I had, and still have, that passcode. However when I went to the company's support site to find how to regenerate the registration code I hit a blank. Nothing there, not even a mention or hint at it. So I E-mailed support asking them about it. I'm going on two YEARS now without getting a response from them despite repeated attempts. I'm a paying customer, I love their software and they won't even give me the honor of a fucking reply. At this point I'd probably settle for a "sorry we lied and you're fucked, go to hell" response as acceptable.
My reaction? Well there isn't a comparable product to switch to or I'd have done so. The software's not cheap (about $70 US) so I'm sure as hell not buying it AGAIN when I already have done so. Even if I was inclined to do that the fact that they won't even respond to my questions as to how to regenerate my registration code tells me they don't deserve the money. So I found a crack and continue to use the software. If any questions ever come up I can prove I bought it and prove they won't respond.
The end result is they lost a huge supporter of their product. I no longer recommend it to anyone as a product to buy. If someone asks about it and likes it I'll tell them about it but I no longer add the "if you try it and like it be sure to buy it" I used to. I don't help them actively find a crack for it but I also don't encourage them not to look for one. As far as I'm concerned the company deserves every pirated copy out there.
Quite frankly if they'd taken an approach like the Echolon folks I'd have sued them and made sure to spread the word to ever news source and site I could find.
While not all companies are like this all the horror stories out there make it clear that MOST of the companies with aggressive software protections ARE lacking in customer support and service. Copy protection will never substitute for treating your customers with respect and giving them the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately the trend seems to be to push the copy protection and ignore the customer service.
But they've only grown in popularity and I find it surprising that so many slashdotters seemed to have jumped on the bandwagon. There was an odd dichotomy the other day with a story article about outsourcing alongside one about a new anime which made me uneasy, and I tried to reason out why. Do you guys not realise that there are fantastic American cartoons out there, that you could spend your money on as well?
Who said we didn't? There are American animated movies I buy as well as Anime. I have nearly all the Disney movies up through the Lion King, I have Shrek and Ice Age. There's a few more I'm forgetting. I also have every single one of the Disney limited edition tins they've released so far. Just because a person likes Anime doesn't mean they instantly hate all American animation. There is a lot of crap out there though, in Anime as well, and people who feel strongly about animation are going to bash what they feel is crappy.
The thing that worries me is that a lot of kids cartoons are imported direct from Japan. And they're the future consumers so things will only get worse. They've got pretty shoddy animation, panning across one cell for example, but because they are the anime style, they're popular. It's the mindless following of a particular style that gets to me, and I see it a lot in the anime fans on Slashdot. *Anything* anime is news. How often do you see any other style of animation being publicised on the main page?
I don't think it's just the anime style that makes most of the imported series popular with kids. All of them have a continous story line in a well defined universe. There's very very few American cartoons that do this. I think it's more a matter of kids are sick of the mindless, plotless, storyless stuf the US studios have been feeding them. There's only so many times you can watch the Road Runner win against Wile Coyote before you're tired of it. Even Cartoon Network's original series are mostly in the mindless entertainment category and they're the only ones really trying to push the envelope in the US. Animation quality also is far less important here than you imply. If the story is good and enjoyable people will watch it and enjoy it. Animation quality is also subjective, I fail to see much, if any, difference between the animation quality in Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, Dragon Ball Z and other popular (with kids) Anime titles and their competing US titles. Face it, animation produced for a 30 minute time slot on TV is not going to have the budgetfor super-duper animation with extremely high in-between rates on the cells.
How is a slashbot mindlessly buying japanese anime regardless of the quality different from a CEO of a large company mindlessly outsourcing to India regardless of the quality? They're both going offshore without looking at other alternatives, because it's suddenly fashionable. But on slashdot, anime cheerleading (zealotry is too strong a word) is good, but outsourcing is hideously evil. There's a bit of hypocrisy going on here, in my opinion.
What you're trying to compare there is apples and kiwi fruit. I'm sure you'll try to argue that buying Japanese Anime takes money from the pockets of US companies but that's not a good argument either. The market for Anime & Manga in the US has lead to a huge influx of income for those US companies who license and sub/dub it for an American audience. Look at ADV, they've gotten huge and put out an enormous amount of Anime and Manga each year. Look at Tokyopop, they were practically a pariah in the Manga community for some shenanigans they pulled several years back. With their 100% Authentic Manga move (and they started it as far as I can tell) they've grown quite a bit and put out a lot of translated Mangas each month. Look at Viz, they were doing OK before but their low episode count (at the same price as competiters with more episodes a volume) kept their business from growing quickly. Now with Pokemon, Shonen Jump and translat
Behind the scenes, I'm quite sure the RIAA isn't doing it all because they feel that Kazaa will ultimately cause them to go bankrupt. What they are really afraid of is permitting artists to see the potential of online music distribution. If that happens and the artists realize they can do just as well by going online and connecting directly to their fans and listening audience, then they will see a better alternative to the perennial shafting they inevitable receive from the RIAA. Once that occurs, the RIAA will become irrelevant and that's what they are deathly afraid of.
They're trying to turn back the clock by painting everything related to online music with the same brush. Let's hope it doesn't work.
Interestingly enough this has happened throughout history just in the realm of music. The first instance (that I'm aware of) was when player pianos first came out. The sheet music industry was all up in arms and declaring they'd be destroyed, that no one would pay for sheet music when they could just have a player piano play it for them, etc. Their reaction was quite similar to the RIAA's reaction over P2P and online music downloading, albeit a bit tamer (IIRC they didn't try to sue people/companies selling rolls for the player pianos.) In that case Congress finally intervened and passed the first compulsary licensing laws. Anyone could create a roll for the player pianos based on existing songs but had to pay so much per roll sold to the composers.
As history goes on there are more occurences, the radio industry came along and caused great upheaval as well, particular to the vaudeville acts. Some managers of vaudeville companies refused to allow their performers to perform on radio at all. There was also concern that radio would destroy composer's livlihood. The same laws congress passed before came to the rescue and radio stations were required to pay so much to the composers of the songs they played. The next big upheaval was sound recordings. Everything played out pretty much the same. In every case compulsary licensing was the solution. (Granted it was a compromise solution, but it worked.) Outside of the msuic business there's also the infamous VCR that the MPAA was convinced would utterly destroy them. (Funny how wrong they were.)
I suspect the RIAA & MPAA will ultimately be unsuccesful, once the cat's out of the bag you can't put it back in. Mp3s aren't going to go away, even if they manage to legislate them as illegal. They also have quite a few artists already embracing online distribution, once there's a few success stories (and there will be, it'll just take some time) other artists will follow suit. Granted it may be a while but major changes never take place overnight, there's always an adjustment period. The member companies of the RIAA & MPAA would find it in their best interests to look at history and see what happens to those who try to keep progress from occurring. Those companies that don't adapt die, and that's where the RIAA's members seem to be heading. Given the way they treat their artists not many people will miss them either.
I don't believe it. Especially if it promotes music swapping on P2P. RIAA personel are on the way to the NYT offices now armed with Cease and Desist orders and an order of retraction.
No, that's not how they operate today, they'll call up their lawyers and file John Doe lawauits against all the editors' kids.
We really need to see more of these type of articles, currently the RIAA/MPAA have managed to drown out the voices of those touting the legal uses of P2P applications. The more people who know about the legit uses, the more of an outcry there'll be. Right now the RIAA has pushed right up against the wall of public apathy, many who don't even fully understand the situation were not happy seeing 12yo girls and Grandparents sued over sharing music. Perhaps an article like this will be the proverbial "last straw" to push the public past their apathy and into full blown "the must change NOW" mode. It'll take that to stop the *AA's lobbying efforts for ridiculous laws like the Induce act.
The RIAA also has been quite effective in making it sound like the Internet and P2P will end music. The reality is it may put an end to the current music industry where profits are reaped at the artists' expense but those who are musically talented will continue to create new music. The most likely end result is an entirely new music distribution mechanism, one that pays the artists fairly. More and more bands are starting to offer Mp3s online, both for free and for small payments. The more people who know about this and start taking advantage of it, the quicker the current crooked practices of the music industry will fail. It might even lead to more good music being out there.:)
at least Walmart can afford to reimburse those customers. After all, they skim a buck from every card every month they remain unused. (If you've got an unused Walmart card from last Christmas, it's lost $9 of its value.)
Except that's not true, you should check your facts before posting. Wal-mart will not take any money off the cards until it remains unused after 24 months. That's 2 years! Also any time you use the card that counter is reset. If it's remained untouched after 2 years it's likely the person who has the card has forgotten or lost it.
I'd say about 100 square feet of the store is under surveillance...
You see 20 registers and 20 black bubbles...
2 of those have cameras...
1 might be recorded...
there's probably someone watching them only on a very high volume weekend.
Not anymore, the newer super centers have a camera in ever single bubble and they're monitored regularly, more so at high volume times. Not sure when they started this but I know the local super center (about 5 years old) is this way because I worked there for a while. You should see the racks and racks of VCRs that record all the cameras!
I worked in a wal-mart for a number of years, the bubbles are to scare people, like the "security tag detectors" on the doors...
Actually most everything expensive now comes in pre-tagged from the manufacturer and those detectors are more than just a scare tactic as well. It's actually pretty effective since it doesn't rely on the employees remembering to tag stuff. It also serves as a source of customer annoyance when the deactivators act up. Management isn't always keen on spending the money to fix them so they'll stay bad for long periods and lots of customers get royally embarassed when the alarm goes off.
Stored value cards are _NOT_ the same as debit cards, in many important respects. For one, the customer CANNOT get cash from the card.
Wal-mart's corporate policy is they can be cashed out in full at any time so how would that affect their classification?
Most people don't know they can cash them out but it's trivial to do (I worked at a Wal-mart for a few years while hunting for new IT work). Just go to the service desk and tell them you'd like to cash the card out. They have to get a CSM or Manager to do an override to allow it (this is mainly for security purposes, for instance to make sure the card is physically there) which is why it's best to do it at the service desk. (Not to mention the service desk employees are more likely to know that it can be done, the cashiers might not.)
There are actually quite a few things that are customer-friendly at Wal-mart that most people don't know about. It's not so much that Wal-mart doesn't want them to know, they just don't bother to advertise them much. For instance if you buy a Sanyo TV the in store warranty is for a full year instead of the 90 days on other TVs. Most employees even don't realize this in fact. You'd think Wal-mart would make sure to advertise this fact as most people would prefer to have the full warranty in store and be more likely to buy their TVs at Wal-mart. From a profit perspective they make pretty much the same on any TV, regardless of brand.
I was part of a small team which created the first such card - Blockbusters - and am still amazed at how fast they've proliferated.
Kudos to you then, they're a great idea. The Wal-mart here has a gas station so I use a shopping card to budget my gas each month. I find it far easier to keep to budget this way since I can't spend the gas money anywhere except at Wal-mart or the gas station there. When I worked at Wal-mart I'd use one to pay for snacks/drinks on breaks. It was a lot easier and quicker (very important when it takes 5 minutes to get to the damn break room) than other methods. I'm not surprised they've taken off like that have though, they made gift certificates much easier for people to buy/give/use and easier for the retailer to sell.
Often these bill collectors get a number and ring it continuously. Sometimes the person at the other end has little or nothing to do with the debt (parents, room mates, etc). After you've informed them of the debt, any more "reminders" are basically harrassment.
For those that may not believe you I can offer a real example. Years ago I lived in apartment housing owned by the University I was attending at the time. They had things setup so the campus phone folks ran the phone service in the apartments too. Additionally phone service was not optional and phone numbers were static. By static I mean they never changed, the phone number for apartment xxx would always be 555-yyyy for every renter (they did this in the dorms as well, and they were sequential even.)
Shortly after I moved in I started having very rude calls left on my answering machine from a bill collector for someone who lived in the apartment (and thus had the same phone number) years ago. Finally one day I was at home when they called so I answered and told them that they didn't live there anymore. Did that work? Oh hell no. The guy got even ruder, yelling and screaming, told me I was a lying SOB and that he KNEW I was the person he was trying to reach. Frankly he did everything short of threatening to come kill me. He broke just about every single federal and state law about bill collecting there was. (And that's the laws for two states, his state and the state I was in.)
So what would you do in this situation? For me I was able to get the campus police to handle it. They filed a complaint with the attorney general of the state of California where the company was located. I never got another phone call after that. I certainly hope the guy was fired, he deserved jail time.
As for me that experience has led to a lifetime habit of screening all calls and never talking to any bill collectors. I should note that not all bill collectors are liks this, some are very ethical and polite. I also spoke with a collector trying to reach the same person about their student loans not being paid. They didn't doubt me at all and I even looked up the numbers for campus information and the financial aid office for them so they could try to find out where he'd moved to.
Unfortunately it seems most (certainly not all) bill collectors are scum and will blatantly break laws to try to intimidate someone into paying. They don't even terribly care if you're the real debtor. If you ask to speak to a supervisor they'll hang up and when you do call back and get a supervisor they'll claim noone logged making a call to you. This is why if you take a call from a bill collector you insist on getting their name, the company's name, their phone number and address and write it all down along with the time of call. If they don't hang up when you ask all that they'll behave like they should as they know they'll be busted if they don't.
Why don't all the geeks in a collective act of corporate law disobediance just start using files with the names of copyrighted music/movies/literature/software and force the record and movie labels to waste tons of their financial resources sending out worthless legal letters?
Let's all configure Apache so that the default index file for all directories is something that'll trigger their auto-nastygrams. Think of the possibilities, your homepage would spider as both www.domain.com and www.domain.com/xfiles.html or www.domain.com/starwars.html
In all seriousness there are names that we could choose that would both trigger their letters and could be defensible as not being a trademark violation. The MPAA & RIAA would have a fit, and given their past performance, they'd try to have laws passed limiting what names you could use as your default directory index file on webservers.
That would be stupid enough that even your average joe non-technical person would wonder why in the hell the law was necessary.
Every new music store offers the same music, just ties you to a different media player. iTunes Music Store, by virtue of being the first, has a greater foothold in the market.
Microsoft has to find a way to be better than iTunes, rather than just selling music in the.wma format. Otherwise, I don't think they'll be beating out iTunes any time soon. Challenging it, yes. Ending up the most popular, no. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I would think by now that those who were going to purchase music online would have started with iTunes or one of its competitors.
You missed the point entirely, Microsoft is up to old tricks again. Look at what they're doing, it's an online music store tied into Windows Media Player. They've already been heavily pushing their DRM to both the RIAA and MPAA member companies. Now they're taking the next step by getting into the online music biz, DRM all the way. (It doesn't really talk about the DRM but I can't see the record companies letting Microsoft sell non-DRM'd tracks even if MS wanted to.)
So what's the point? It's to leverage their monopoly (Windows OS, Windows Media Player bundled with said OS) into the online music business. Later they'll be able to leverage it further into the online video business whenever it shows up. Even if Microsoft's store doesn't become the number one standard it'll help them to get their DRM to be the "standard" DRM out there. Next thing you know Microsoft has a new monopoly on DRM and makes more money than the record companies and movie studios do on legal downloads. They have more than enough cash reserves to hemmorage money on this venture until it pays off by giving them another monopoly so they can outlast any competitors (Apple for instance).
So what's after the "Plateau of Productivity"?
on
The Technology Hype Cycle
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I noticed the chart ends at the "Plateau of Productivity" but that isn't where all technology ends. Just look at things such as phonographs (you can barely find them anymore). On a more pertinent note the Internet seems to be going a bit downhill from that plateau thanks to spam, popup ads, malware, virus, worms, etc.
So while it's an interesting article I don't think they've accounted for everything or, more likely, they don't want to talk about the next step which is probably a slow (or fast) death for technology which is ursurped by the next new thing. Also while the idea seems to be this "Hype Cycle" can help predict the path of a technology the article itself throws cold water on that idea. They readily admit the iPod threw off all their predictions for the Mp3 player market (now called simple digital music players). The hype cycle seems more of a hindsight tool than a forward looking predictor.
The new design looks a lot like a laptop computer (without a lid) on a base. Right now it's obviously a desktop model with no internal battery but how hard would it be to make it portable? It would be pretty darn useful even if it was fairly heavy just to be able to take with you to meetings in the office. Once the meeting's over you go back to your office/cubicle and pop it back onto the base and plug it into the wall outlet. Of course it would need to take handwritten notes with a stylus (like Tablet PCs) but it would be a very useful feature and might lead to more sales for Apple, especially in the business market.
This isn't too surprising, it's a logical next step to take since digital video runs a close 2nd behind digital music in terms of popularity online. It'd also be a bit of a boon to portable video devices since not having to waste power to spin a disk would give longer battery life.
The only thing I wonder about is how the MPAA and its member companies will take this. Hopefully Apple's talked to them already or is in the process or they could find themselves with a wonderful videoPod without any way to get movies for it legally. Given their success with iTunes and the iTunes store I'm inclined to believe they have this worked out already though.
I wasn't as excited about the iPod since I have a portable CD/Mp3 player and it works fine for me. I would be quite excited and interested in a video device though.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh man, Lucas finally releases the original trilogy on DVD, AOL starts at least trying to have some form of security both in the same day. That has got to be a major sign of the impending apocalypse. If Microsoft announces it's dropping Windows to develop Linux before the day's out I'm heading for the mountains!
-
and then not releasing the original versions that many people want to buy.
If there really is a huge piracy problem for the original trilogy then this is the reason why. People have been begging, screaming, whining and complaining about the lack of a DVD release of the original trilogy at least since Episode I came out on DVD. That's been about 4 years now so of course people are going to start turning to alternatives. I'd be willing to bet a large amount of those "pirating" the original trilogy own the VHS version and have already preordered the DVD boxset.Personally I have the only digital version released up till now -- the laserdisc version. Still I'm not keen on the two pauses you have to deal with per movie (one double-sided disc, one single sided per movie) so I preordered the box set. There's not a huge number of people with laserdisc players (even at the height of their popularity, such as it was) much less both a player and the Star Wars LDs, everyone else wanting a digital version has been SOL up till today.
While that doesn't really make it right that people have pirated it, I'm not going to be feeling sorry for Lucas. Quite frankly, he brought that particular piracy mess on himself by being stubborn and ignoring fan requests. He'll still make barrel loads of money off the DVD boxset anyway so it's not like he's going to suffer. Neither are those that worked on the original trilogy, he did share profits with the cast and crew on The Empire Strikes Back at least, I believe he did so on Return of the Jedi as well. (For those buying the boxset the new documentary included will tell the details, I caught it on A&E a few weeks back.) About the only "victims" I can see for piracy of the original trilogy would be the stores who didn't have the product to sell in the first place.
And frankly it'd sell well even if he'd made us wait as long as he originally intended, although he may have lost all remaining fan goodwill towards him.
-
Humans have never devised a way to kill viruses once inside the body.
Not true, there are anti-viral drugs. There's one used to treat Shingles as well as other diseases caused by the same virus called Famvir. In that case it can't get rid of all of them but if taken within 76 hours of an outbreak of Shingles it can help greatly is reducing the length of the outbreak and subsequent pain. I'm sure there are others as well.What you're thinking is that we can't create a drug that is broad-spectrum in attacking multiple viruses like many antibiotics are. The odds are against that happening due to the huge variances in viruses. At least most bacteria have some common grounds to attack, like their protective shells.
-
I haven't seen anything in Induce about the abolishment of unencrypted CDs...
And I didn't say it did, I said that was their ultimate goals. It'll happen in another bill introducted later on.-
Are you really going to tell me that members of Congress would step aside and let the RIAA kill a technology - audio CDs - that *almost every single one* of their constituents use?
How many millions of people use P2P apps in the US? Congress is not only stepping aside, they're helping the RIAA get legislation passed that will criminalize a lot of P2P apps. The wording is still so vague that it'll be too risky for companies to continue to offer them. So yes they'd be more than happy to do so, they're already doing it with another technology.-
Digital television broadcasting, with all analog broadcasts off the air by 2003? Meaning everyone has to buy a thousand-plus dollar television or get cable?
Perhaps you've not followed that issue very closely, it's still going to occur, you'll have to buy a new TV or a down converter although cable companies may down convert for their non-HD subscribers. They've only pushed back the date for stations to stop broadcasting in analog, not stopped it.-
They're really going to do that again, with people having to buy new CD players that will not play unencrypted discs... come on.
It's not too far of a stretch, when's the last time your congressperson seemed to defend your interests and not the industries lobbying them and donating to them? They passed the DMCA and everyone hates it but they aren't willing to pass new laws to restore consumer rights it took away. They're moving full steam ahead on the Induce act, both parties in fact, and I know of no one outside of the Music and Movie industries that think it's a good idea, much less want it to be passed. They haven't listened to us in the past, aren't in the present so why would they in the future?-
do you really mean all the way to the *speakers*, or is it all the way to the *(pre)amp*?
I honestly don't know, that's a quote from the article and that's how they worded it.-
That's impossible, you could get 2 pc's together and use the line out/in sockets. How are they going to know the audio stream is copyright once it has left it's digital form?
Technologically that would be audio watermarking but I suspect it'll just be simpler for them to get things to where it's assumed that the audio stream is always copyrighted. You'll have to buy special software/hardware to record your own stuff, even if you do own it.-
The point isn't to make it impossible to copy... the point is to make it past the point of diminishing returns. If you have to work too hard to do it, most people will just give up and/or buy the media. Which is what they want.
No they want to make sure it's not possible for anyone to rip it by any means necessary. They've already figured out that you can't put the genie back in the bottle so they want to make sure it can't get out onto the Internet for download. I do believe they've finally figured out that a technological solution to 100% blocking music ripping is impossible so they'll go with a multi-pronged approach:- Make sure no unprotected discs can go on the market. This will be accomplished both by legal means and collusion between studios to halt the production of unprotected discs. Existing unsold discs in the market will be recalled and quite likely destroyed.
- Make it a crime to break the protection on the new products. The penalties for breaking this law will likely end up being more severe than for more serious crimes such as rape, murder or even drug offenses.
- Make it a crime to create or use P2P networks. They know it's not going to work to try to stop just music being traded on them so they have to get them outlawed completely. The Induce act is the first step in this process. (I seriously doubt it's the last, there will be more that will make the Induce act look tame.)
- Go after other distribution channels, Usenet providers are likely to start seeing lawsuits from the RIAA. I predict within 2 years the first Usenet provider will be sued with the claim that they're liable for everything that crosses Usenet.
- What's left? IRC and IM. This will be the next step. They'll probably save this until they have unprotected CDs outlawed, this will allow them to work on legislation to require all messaging apps to include code to inspect a file for watermarks and refuse to transfer it if it has them.
- Go after anything new that pops up in the interim.
I know it sounds fairly paranoid but their current history of bills they've gotten passed or attempted to pass support this. It's a fairly logical extension to it all. The recording industry has already displayed a willingness to lose the CD logo on discs so that they can put copy protection on them. They're also willing to sue and destroy their own customers (how many lawsuits have been filed against downloaders now?). They've proven they are not willing to compromise on this, they want it their way and their way is that everyone pays. They also want to make you pay again to use the music you buy in other formats, look at their DRM restrictions so far.-
So how does my home entertainment center read the discs? Do you suppose they will mandate that every consumer must purchase new cd-playback devices to be compatable?
Existing devices would be able to play existing non-encrypted discs and you'd be SOL for the new protected stuff. Frankly the way they've been going I do believe they want to mandate the purchase of new hardware in order to get new music. That way they can avoid (in their minds at least) all the problems with that pesky pre-existing equipment.-
How do they phase this in? The hit on the industry would be disasterous and then after that hit, the encryption will be cracked...
I doubt they want a phase-in period, they want a cold turkey switch. Yes the encryption will be cracked but they'll make sure it's a crime to both crack it and use that information to extract the audio. (In fact it probably already is under the DMCA.) In their world view you either pay up for new equipment and their overpriced music (aka crap), do without or rot in jail for the horrid crime of wanting to exercise what used to be known as fair use rights. (Those will be legislated away of course.)-
so who loses? The recording industry and the consumers..
Bingo! But we already have proof that the recording industry is blind to this fact. All the lawsuits are not helping the industry. Online "piracy" is as rampant as ever, sales of CDs continue to decline and even the major success story of online music sales iTunes isn't making a dent in the drop of sales. The recording industry is driven by one sole thing -- greed. Everything to them is how best to profit from whatever they do. This is blinding them to reality and everything that causes sales to drop is someone else's fault, never theirs. This is going to continue until, well, until the existing recording industry no longer exists.I suspect a lot of people are going to say that I'm just being paranoid here but if you look at the bills the recording industry has gotten introduced over the years together they are heading for exactly for what I'm saying. Congress has proven unwilling to listen to their constituents on this matter, just look at the broad bi-partisan backing of the Induce act! Anyone that's told about it just stares at you and the response is generally "how can they do that?" (in regards to what the Induce act hopes to do to P2P makers). Yet congress is going full steam ahead to passing it. Right now it looks like it's not a matter of if the Induce act will be passed, it's a matter of WHEN. Once it's law then there will be more bills, one at a time, gradually pushing towards that utopic future (for the recording industry anyway) where it's illegal to make an unprotected CD and quite likely it will be illegal to make CD players that can play the old unprotected ones as well.
-
The CDs are still going to have regular audio tracks, so they can play in regular CD players. Longhorn will still read regular audio tracks, so it can still play old CDs that don't have a DRMed copy of their content. Even if Longhorn checks for a mixed-mode CD and restricts access to the music portion, that breaks older mixed-mode CDs that have the music on the audio portion only, and other content on the data portion. Bottom line, it sounds to me like I'll still be able to just hold shift.
Right now this is true but given the efforts the RIAA has been making with getting laws passed in the US by the time Longhorn comes out it may not be LEGAL to include a regular unencrypted audio track on a CD any more. While consumers and home audio companies would be livid about this, Congress and the RIAA seem to think ideas like that are just grand. Look at the DMCA and the proposed Induce act for examples.-
There is always another way to rip the audio from CDs. So Microsoft builds copy protection into their OS. Who cares. It wont stop me from making backups of my CDs.
It could actually, or at least make it extremely difficult. The article says it's not clear what method Microsoft is pushing but it could be the "Secure Audio Path" concept (which would protect content all the way to a computer's speakers, making it impossible to make digital copies by recording from the soundcard). In that case Microsoft would likely mandate hardware changes or hardware wouldn't be certified as usable with Longhorn or simply Longhorn would refuse to accept it. Even if you use Linux if all the hardware you get enforces the copy protection in the hardware it's going to make it really difficult to rip the audio from those CDs.-
Many independent labels are rumoured to be terrified by the proposal, our sources suggest, which could grant Microsoft the mandate on CD copy protection and, if it is accepted by the industry, potentially increase the costs of CD production.
While here onI don't know about you but that thought's pretty scary. I don't like copy protection at all (I bought the damn thing, I want to do what I want to with it, and no that doesn't include sharing it illegally) if it's going to happen I don't think Microsoft is a trustworthy steward to have in control of it. Based on their past actions the whole music industry would probably get worse than the current corrupt and abusive (to artists and fans) system.
-
To hell with vendors that treat long-term customers like criminals. I had purchased, used, upgraded and recommended the offending publisher's products since 1991.
I had a situation a few years back where I lost all of my computers and backups quite unexpectedly and had to rebuild. I use a particular E-mail program that's quite good and secure and has tons of features that I find quite useful (it even goes way beyond what I'll ever need). I bought a copy of it several years back, and at the time I had to choose a passcode that, I was told, would be used to regenerate my registration code if it was ever lost. I had, and still have, that passcode. However when I went to the company's support site to find how to regenerate the registration code I hit a blank. Nothing there, not even a mention or hint at it. So I E-mailed support asking them about it. I'm going on two YEARS now without getting a response from them despite repeated attempts. I'm a paying customer, I love their software and they won't even give me the honor of a fucking reply. At this point I'd probably settle for a "sorry we lied and you're fucked, go to hell" response as acceptable.My reaction? Well there isn't a comparable product to switch to or I'd have done so. The software's not cheap (about $70 US) so I'm sure as hell not buying it AGAIN when I already have done so. Even if I was inclined to do that the fact that they won't even respond to my questions as to how to regenerate my registration code tells me they don't deserve the money. So I found a crack and continue to use the software. If any questions ever come up I can prove I bought it and prove they won't respond.
The end result is they lost a huge supporter of their product. I no longer recommend it to anyone as a product to buy. If someone asks about it and likes it I'll tell them about it but I no longer add the "if you try it and like it be sure to buy it" I used to. I don't help them actively find a crack for it but I also don't encourage them not to look for one. As far as I'm concerned the company deserves every pirated copy out there.
Quite frankly if they'd taken an approach like the Echolon folks I'd have sued them and made sure to spread the word to ever news source and site I could find.
While not all companies are like this all the horror stories out there make it clear that MOST of the companies with aggressive software protections ARE lacking in customer support and service. Copy protection will never substitute for treating your customers with respect and giving them the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately the trend seems to be to push the copy protection and ignore the customer service.
Who said we didn't? There are American animated movies I buy as well as Anime. I have nearly all the Disney movies up through the Lion King, I have Shrek and Ice Age. There's a few more I'm forgetting. I also have every single one of the Disney limited edition tins they've released so far. Just because a person likes Anime doesn't mean they instantly hate all American animation. There is a lot of crap out there though, in Anime as well, and people who feel strongly about animation are going to bash what they feel is crappy.
I don't think it's just the anime style that makes most of the imported series popular with kids. All of them have a continous story line in a well defined universe. There's very very few American cartoons that do this. I think it's more a matter of kids are sick of the mindless, plotless, storyless stuf the US studios have been feeding them. There's only so many times you can watch the Road Runner win against Wile Coyote before you're tired of it. Even Cartoon Network's original series are mostly in the mindless entertainment category and they're the only ones really trying to push the envelope in the US. Animation quality also is far less important here than you imply. If the story is good and enjoyable people will watch it and enjoy it. Animation quality is also subjective, I fail to see much, if any, difference between the animation quality in Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, Dragon Ball Z and other popular (with kids) Anime titles and their competing US titles. Face it, animation produced for a 30 minute time slot on TV is not going to have the budgetfor super-duper animation with extremely high in-between rates on the cells.
What you're trying to compare there is apples and kiwi fruit. I'm sure you'll try to argue that buying Japanese Anime takes money from the pockets of US companies but that's not a good argument either. The market for Anime & Manga in the US has lead to a huge influx of income for those US companies who license and sub/dub it for an American audience. Look at ADV, they've gotten huge and put out an enormous amount of Anime and Manga each year. Look at Tokyopop, they were practically a pariah in the Manga community for some shenanigans they pulled several years back. With their 100% Authentic Manga move (and they started it as far as I can tell) they've grown quite a bit and put out a lot of translated Mangas each month. Look at Viz, they were doing OK before but their low episode count (at the same price as competiters with more episodes a volume) kept their business from growing quickly. Now with Pokemon, Shonen Jump and translat
-
Behind the scenes, I'm quite sure the RIAA isn't doing it all because they feel that Kazaa will ultimately cause them to go bankrupt. What they are really afraid of is permitting artists to see the potential of online music distribution. If that happens and the artists realize they can do just as well by going online and connecting directly to their fans and listening audience, then they will see a better alternative to the perennial shafting they inevitable receive from the RIAA. Once that occurs, the RIAA will become irrelevant and that's what they are deathly afraid of.
Interestingly enough this has happened throughout history just in the realm of music. The first instance (that I'm aware of) was when player pianos first came out. The sheet music industry was all up in arms and declaring they'd be destroyed, that no one would pay for sheet music when they could just have a player piano play it for them, etc. Their reaction was quite similar to the RIAA's reaction over P2P and online music downloading, albeit a bit tamer (IIRC they didn't try to sue people/companies selling rolls for the player pianos.) In that case Congress finally intervened and passed the first compulsary licensing laws. Anyone could create a roll for the player pianos based on existing songs but had to pay so much per roll sold to the composers.They're trying to turn back the clock by painting everything related to online music with the same brush. Let's hope it doesn't work.
As history goes on there are more occurences, the radio industry came along and caused great upheaval as well, particular to the vaudeville acts. Some managers of vaudeville companies refused to allow their performers to perform on radio at all. There was also concern that radio would destroy composer's livlihood. The same laws congress passed before came to the rescue and radio stations were required to pay so much to the composers of the songs they played. The next big upheaval was sound recordings. Everything played out pretty much the same. In every case compulsary licensing was the solution. (Granted it was a compromise solution, but it worked.) Outside of the msuic business there's also the infamous VCR that the MPAA was convinced would utterly destroy them. (Funny how wrong they were.)
I suspect the RIAA & MPAA will ultimately be unsuccesful, once the cat's out of the bag you can't put it back in. Mp3s aren't going to go away, even if they manage to legislate them as illegal. They also have quite a few artists already embracing online distribution, once there's a few success stories (and there will be, it'll just take some time) other artists will follow suit. Granted it may be a while but major changes never take place overnight, there's always an adjustment period. The member companies of the RIAA & MPAA would find it in their best interests to look at history and see what happens to those who try to keep progress from occurring. Those companies that don't adapt die, and that's where the RIAA's members seem to be heading. Given the way they treat their artists not many people will miss them either.
-
I don't believe it. Especially if it promotes music swapping on P2P. RIAA personel are on the way to the NYT offices now armed with Cease and Desist orders and an order of retraction.
No, that's not how they operate today, they'll call up their lawyers and file John Doe lawauits against all the editors' kids.The RIAA also has been quite effective in making it sound like the Internet and P2P will end music. The reality is it may put an end to the current music industry where profits are reaped at the artists' expense but those who are musically talented will continue to create new music. The most likely end result is an entirely new music distribution mechanism, one that pays the artists fairly. More and more bands are starting to offer Mp3s online, both for free and for small payments. The more people who know about this and start taking advantage of it, the quicker the current crooked practices of the music industry will fail. It might even lead to more good music being out there. :)
-
at least Walmart can afford to reimburse those customers. After all, they skim a buck from every card every month they remain unused. (If you've got an unused Walmart card from last Christmas, it's lost $9 of its value.)
Except that's not true, you should check your facts before posting. Wal-mart will not take any money off the cards until it remains unused after 24 months. That's 2 years! Also any time you use the card that counter is reset. If it's remained untouched after 2 years it's likely the person who has the card has forgotten or lost it.- I'd say about 100 square feet of the store is under surveillance...
Not anymore, the newer super centers have a camera in ever single bubble and they're monitored regularly, more so at high volume times. Not sure when they started this but I know the local super center (about 5 years old) is this way because I worked there for a while. You should see the racks and racks of VCRs that record all the cameras!You see 20 registers and 20 black bubbles... 2 of those have cameras... 1 might be recorded... there's probably someone watching them only on a very high volume weekend.
-
I worked in a wal-mart for a number of years, the bubbles are to scare people, like the "security tag detectors" on the doors...
Actually most everything expensive now comes in pre-tagged from the manufacturer and those detectors are more than just a scare tactic as well. It's actually pretty effective since it doesn't rely on the employees remembering to tag stuff. It also serves as a source of customer annoyance when the deactivators act up. Management isn't always keen on spending the money to fix them so they'll stay bad for long periods and lots of customers get royally embarassed when the alarm goes off.-
Stored value cards are _NOT_ the same as debit cards, in many important respects. For one, the customer CANNOT get cash from the card.
Wal-mart's corporate policy is they can be cashed out in full at any time so how would that affect their classification?Most people don't know they can cash them out but it's trivial to do (I worked at a Wal-mart for a few years while hunting for new IT work). Just go to the service desk and tell them you'd like to cash the card out. They have to get a CSM or Manager to do an override to allow it (this is mainly for security purposes, for instance to make sure the card is physically there) which is why it's best to do it at the service desk. (Not to mention the service desk employees are more likely to know that it can be done, the cashiers might not.)
There are actually quite a few things that are customer-friendly at Wal-mart that most people don't know about. It's not so much that Wal-mart doesn't want them to know, they just don't bother to advertise them much. For instance if you buy a Sanyo TV the in store warranty is for a full year instead of the 90 days on other TVs. Most employees even don't realize this in fact. You'd think Wal-mart would make sure to advertise this fact as most people would prefer to have the full warranty in store and be more likely to buy their TVs at Wal-mart. From a profit perspective they make pretty much the same on any TV, regardless of brand.
-
I was part of a small team which created the first such card - Blockbusters - and am still amazed at how fast they've proliferated.
Kudos to you then, they're a great idea. The Wal-mart here has a gas station so I use a shopping card to budget my gas each month. I find it far easier to keep to budget this way since I can't spend the gas money anywhere except at Wal-mart or the gas station there. When I worked at Wal-mart I'd use one to pay for snacks/drinks on breaks. It was a lot easier and quicker (very important when it takes 5 minutes to get to the damn break room) than other methods. I'm not surprised they've taken off like that have though, they made gift certificates much easier for people to buy/give/use and easier for the retailer to sell.-
Often these bill collectors get a number and ring it continuously. Sometimes the person at the other end has little or nothing to do with the debt (parents, room mates, etc). After you've informed them of the debt, any more "reminders" are basically harrassment.
For those that may not believe you I can offer a real example. Years ago I lived in apartment housing owned by the University I was attending at the time. They had things setup so the campus phone folks ran the phone service in the apartments too. Additionally phone service was not optional and phone numbers were static. By static I mean they never changed, the phone number for apartment xxx would always be 555-yyyy for every renter (they did this in the dorms as well, and they were sequential even.)Shortly after I moved in I started having very rude calls left on my answering machine from a bill collector for someone who lived in the apartment (and thus had the same phone number) years ago. Finally one day I was at home when they called so I answered and told them that they didn't live there anymore. Did that work? Oh hell no. The guy got even ruder, yelling and screaming, told me I was a lying SOB and that he KNEW I was the person he was trying to reach. Frankly he did everything short of threatening to come kill me. He broke just about every single federal and state law about bill collecting there was. (And that's the laws for two states, his state and the state I was in.)
So what would you do in this situation? For me I was able to get the campus police to handle it. They filed a complaint with the attorney general of the state of California where the company was located. I never got another phone call after that. I certainly hope the guy was fired, he deserved jail time.
As for me that experience has led to a lifetime habit of screening all calls and never talking to any bill collectors. I should note that not all bill collectors are liks this, some are very ethical and polite. I also spoke with a collector trying to reach the same person about their student loans not being paid. They didn't doubt me at all and I even looked up the numbers for campus information and the financial aid office for them so they could try to find out where he'd moved to.
Unfortunately it seems most (certainly not all) bill collectors are scum and will blatantly break laws to try to intimidate someone into paying. They don't even terribly care if you're the real debtor. If you ask to speak to a supervisor they'll hang up and when you do call back and get a supervisor they'll claim noone logged making a call to you. This is why if you take a call from a bill collector you insist on getting their name, the company's name, their phone number and address and write it all down along with the time of call. If they don't hang up when you ask all that they'll behave like they should as they know they'll be busted if they don't.
-
Why don't all the geeks in a collective act of corporate law disobediance just start using files with the names of copyrighted music/movies/literature/software and force the record and movie labels to waste tons of their financial resources sending out worthless legal letters?
Let's all configure Apache so that the default index file for all directories is something that'll trigger their auto-nastygrams. Think of the possibilities, your homepage would spider as both www.domain.com and www.domain.com/xfiles.html or www.domain.com/starwars.htmlIn all seriousness there are names that we could choose that would both trigger their letters and could be defensible as not being a trademark violation. The MPAA & RIAA would have a fit, and given their past performance, they'd try to have laws passed limiting what names you could use as your default directory index file on webservers.
That would be stupid enough that even your average joe non-technical person would wonder why in the hell the law was necessary.
-
Every new music store offers the same music, just ties you to a different media player. iTunes Music Store, by virtue of being the first, has a greater foothold in the market.
You missed the point entirely, Microsoft is up to old tricks again. Look at what they're doing, it's an online music store tied into Windows Media Player. They've already been heavily pushing their DRM to both the RIAA and MPAA member companies. Now they're taking the next step by getting into the online music biz, DRM all the way. (It doesn't really talk about the DRM but I can't see the record companies letting Microsoft sell non-DRM'd tracks even if MS wanted to.)Microsoft has to find a way to be better than iTunes, rather than just selling music in the .wma format. Otherwise, I don't think they'll be beating out iTunes any time soon. Challenging it, yes. Ending up the most popular, no. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I would think by now that those who were going to purchase music online would have started with iTunes or one of its competitors.
So what's the point? It's to leverage their monopoly (Windows OS, Windows Media Player bundled with said OS) into the online music business. Later they'll be able to leverage it further into the online video business whenever it shows up. Even if Microsoft's store doesn't become the number one standard it'll help them to get their DRM to be the "standard" DRM out there. Next thing you know Microsoft has a new monopoly on DRM and makes more money than the record companies and movie studios do on legal downloads. They have more than enough cash reserves to hemmorage money on this venture until it pays off by giving them another monopoly so they can outlast any competitors (Apple for instance).
So while it's an interesting article I don't think they've accounted for everything or, more likely, they don't want to talk about the next step which is probably a slow (or fast) death for technology which is ursurped by the next new thing. Also while the idea seems to be this "Hype Cycle" can help predict the path of a technology the article itself throws cold water on that idea. They readily admit the iPod threw off all their predictions for the Mp3 player market (now called simple digital music players). The hype cycle seems more of a hindsight tool than a forward looking predictor.
The new design looks a lot like a laptop computer (without a lid) on a base. Right now it's obviously a desktop model with no internal battery but how hard would it be to make it portable? It would be pretty darn useful even if it was fairly heavy just to be able to take with you to meetings in the office. Once the meeting's over you go back to your office/cubicle and pop it back onto the base and plug it into the wall outlet. Of course it would need to take handwritten notes with a stylus (like Tablet PCs) but it would be a very useful feature and might lead to more sales for Apple, especially in the business market.
The only thing I wonder about is how the MPAA and its member companies will take this. Hopefully Apple's talked to them already or is in the process or they could find themselves with a wonderful videoPod without any way to get movies for it legally. Given their success with iTunes and the iTunes store I'm inclined to believe they have this worked out already though.
I wasn't as excited about the iPod since I have a portable CD/Mp3 player and it works fine for me. I would be quite excited and interested in a video device though.