703 Pride!
Not sure, I know colossus moved to telnet for a while, the armada lasted a long time too. Past those two most of them shut down around 96-97.
Such as the fact that the RIAA charges the distributors 66cents per track, so they can't drop prices much below what they are currently doing and still pulling a profit. 99cents a song is still not a very good deal, it starts breaking apart the problem of buying a full cd and getting only one or two good tracks.
The reason that there is still so much p2p activity in music sharing is that you can buy 20 tracks on itunes, avg of 3 minutes a track, thats an hour of music for 20$. That same 20$ can buy you the latest blockbuster dvd that cost upwards of 100 million to make and took a huge cast years of their lives, most likely is at least 2 hours long and will have directors commentery, and possibly a bunch of neat extras to entice people to buy it.
Yes people pirate movies too, but no where in the same numbers of songs [yes size does come into play here], but its also what you are getting for your money, with the cost that it takes the RIAA to get an album from a band.
Even larger named ones are at most 1-2 million [counting studio time, salries, advertising, I am not counting touring, and I may be a bit off for the figures but for every major band out there that demands 10million an album there is a slew of ones that are doing it for next to nothing].
With the removal of the cost of printed media and requirements of having physical space in record stores, 5-10cents would be a reasonable cut for the RIAA per track, possibly having songs on a sliding scale. Yes we would all like free music, however the RIAA is clinging to ways and prices that do not work with the current econamy. You can get a netflix subscription for around 20$ a month and rent all the movies you want, I see no reason why the music industry could not adopt some kind of similiar approach, there are a number of ways they could have a sustained business model that is working.
For another example look at any number of Asian countries where piracy is rampent, the record industries there realized they could not compete directly with the prices of pirates [for bootlegged cd's on the streets] so they started charging next to nothing for albums and used those as promotional tools to get people to the real money market for them which are concerts and public apperances by the music stars.
It stands to reason that the 60 pages is just filler. That the legal advice they paid millions for told them to back out of the lawsuit without it looking totally frivilous. By not submitting the information they hope it gets thrown out of court. That way it doesn't crush cases they plan to file against other companies, and they can continue the FUD without showing anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Keep in mind Haliburton doesnt pay taxes.
It's the RIAA's new version of Pokemon. I choose you litigationchu!
703 Pride! Not sure, I know colossus moved to telnet for a while, the armada lasted a long time too. Past those two most of them shut down around 96-97.
Such as the fact that the RIAA charges the distributors 66cents per track, so they can't drop prices much below what they are currently doing and still pulling a profit. 99cents a song is still not a very good deal, it starts breaking apart the problem of buying a full cd and getting only one or two good tracks. The reason that there is still so much p2p activity in music sharing is that you can buy 20 tracks on itunes, avg of 3 minutes a track, thats an hour of music for 20$. That same 20$ can buy you the latest blockbuster dvd that cost upwards of 100 million to make and took a huge cast years of their lives, most likely is at least 2 hours long and will have directors commentery, and possibly a bunch of neat extras to entice people to buy it. Yes people pirate movies too, but no where in the same numbers of songs [yes size does come into play here], but its also what you are getting for your money, with the cost that it takes the RIAA to get an album from a band. Even larger named ones are at most 1-2 million [counting studio time, salries, advertising, I am not counting touring, and I may be a bit off for the figures but for every major band out there that demands 10million an album there is a slew of ones that are doing it for next to nothing]. With the removal of the cost of printed media and requirements of having physical space in record stores, 5-10cents would be a reasonable cut for the RIAA per track, possibly having songs on a sliding scale. Yes we would all like free music, however the RIAA is clinging to ways and prices that do not work with the current econamy. You can get a netflix subscription for around 20$ a month and rent all the movies you want, I see no reason why the music industry could not adopt some kind of similiar approach, there are a number of ways they could have a sustained business model that is working. For another example look at any number of Asian countries where piracy is rampent, the record industries there realized they could not compete directly with the prices of pirates [for bootlegged cd's on the streets] so they started charging next to nothing for albums and used those as promotional tools to get people to the real money market for them which are concerts and public apperances by the music stars.
Remember 4 digit slashdot users make baby jesus cry
This slashdot article paid for by thinkgeek.
It stands to reason that the 60 pages is just filler. That the legal advice they paid millions for told them to back out of the lawsuit without it looking totally frivilous. By not submitting the information they hope it gets thrown out of court. That way it doesn't crush cases they plan to file against other companies, and they can continue the FUD without showing anything.