Most File Sharers Hypothetically Say They would actually.... WATCH what they download, legal or otherwise. Mostly they just download compulsively so that they have the option to view it, maybe, if they ever get around to it. I personally can't afford paying my attention for stuff "good enough to swipe now and maybe watch later for free" But honestly, its the stuff I can't steel that's worth paying for presently that interests me enough to look at it now, and demands all my available viewer time. I never get around to wanting the "available" more than the scarce - when the selection exceeds mortality.
My solution... bit torrent. I would have gladly paid for it, or sat through a few Hulu commercials, but they simply don't make it available.
Fear not grasshopper, they got something more valuable: real statistical market data that reflects the willingness to delay gratification. Its easy to buy things on impulse, but its takes commitment to pursue and acquire inventory that is not for sale. I think they gather valuable information and gain insight into their customer and market.
To recap: The songs you hear on the radio are paid for by those commercials you hear between the songs. They are not free.
I understand your point, but let me point out an important distinction here. They don't pay a cent more if I turn on the radio and listen. Or if a million people do. That "paid for" song is exactly that, in the old paradigm: IT WAS PAID FOR. They didn't make you pay for it over and over again, or monitor who was listening, or whether they taped the "king biscuit flower hour" on KLOS. That fee agreement was an extortion settlement with broadcasters since they generate advertising revenues from others. It was lawsuit insurance protection payoff. But don't delude yourself into thinking that it "pays" for the song in the same way that it is in digital domains. What payed for music then was record sales - and that only happens if WE HEAR THE SONGS. That is why the record companies were giving PAYOLA that was 1000 times the ASCAP/BMI licensing agreements. When radio broadcast that song for 3 cents, it made NO DIFFERENCE to the cost, and it made NO ACCOUNTING if I or anyone had the radio on or off. It was a FLAT FEE. It also had no adjustment to the cost if I record it to a cassette tape. Copyright laws pertain to that situation in analog technology where ONE copy of a broadcast was ruled FAIR USE after Sony Beta arrived. BUT THE TERMS OFFERED TODAY ARE BY NO MEANS FAIR WHEN DRM ACCOUNTS FOR EVERY EAR AND DEVICE AD NAUSIUM and restricts your media and devices, and mines your market data. You can argue the moral relevance of apples and oranges, but bottom line is that the "piracy" that occurs is a direct response to the "rip off" greed that knows no bounds in the Corporate meat grinder. If the price for listening to the song is priced like it was in radio days - in other words, a flat nominal 3 cent fee PAID FOR the broadcast - no matter how many ears were tuned in or tape decks rolling, then there would be no need to "pirate". But the licensing arrangement proposed at this point of technology is preposterous, and I ain't paying, and nobody is going to buy if its not worth it. I am not stealing it either, I am just not a customer - not like I was when I felt I got what I paid for ONCE. Today, I'll occasionally buy tunes directly from the artists, at the concert, or on their web, but Sony and Universal Thorn EMI and Warner's Polydor, Apple, whatever can kiss my ass goodbye. Ultimately, a marketing plan that works will be the one that offers the bast value in the current social economic and cultural landscape. I've outgrown that demographic, I'm over that hill. But I really believe that the rip off is a two way street. "Pirates" are the "customers" once they decide they want to buy the product. These twits want to charge for the commercial, and only lend a license you intend to own. If it ain't worth stealing, it ain't worth paying for either, and nobody is hearing it at all. Given the choice of selling 1000 $1 tunes or a million pennies, the latter is always preferable, especially when its made out of a download of digital bandwidth. Its frigging electrons - and its prolific distribution is exactly what they want no matter how much they piss and moan about not getting paid enough. If that were really true, they would be dentists.
PIRACY involves the true (not imaginary)loss of actual monies specifically spent on the the stolen product, with cash from a real customer that goes to the PIRATE in exchange for stolen treasure, thus PIRACY.
Downloading media that is not generating revenue, nor taking actual cash dollars in exchange for stolen or counterfeit inventory, is just listening to tunes, like last century "hearing the music on the radio" was free bandwidth with copyright material that could be recorded off the air, sold the license or suggested piracy. It was Fair Use.
I have heard zillions of "stolen" songs on the radio and paid for zero - it never cost anyone a sale. However, I have spent many tens of thousands on music and concerts and media and swag and fashion, audio gear, etc... Nowadays, no more "old style" radio worth hearing, I use the streaming web, or mp3s or rip off ipods, which function like 20th century radio..like the free radio. I don't make disks, or duplicate and sell it, and it ain't piracy no matter how many times the greedy corporate scum executives of the entertainment industry rape and pillage, and have been robbing artists and customers revenue for years. Its their only skill. This is why nobody believes the whining of rich assholes anymore - they never cry when they grab the cash, only when they can't get everything from a supersaturated market.
Basil: Did we get Dr. Evil? Radar Operator: No, sir, he got away in that big spaceship that looks like a huge... Teacher: Penis. The male reproductive organ. Also known as tallywhacker, schlong, or... Friendly Dad: Wiener? Any of your kids want another wiener? Friendly Son: Dad, what's that? Friendly Dad: I don't know, son, but it has great big... Peanut Vendor: Nuts. Hot, salty nuts. Who wants some?... Peanut Vendor: Lord Almighty! Woman: That looks just like my husband's... Circus Barker: ONE-EYED MONSTER. Step right up and see the One-eyed Monster! Cyclops: RARRR. Cyclops: Hey, what's that? It looks like a... Fan: Woody. Woody Harrelson. Could I have your autograph? Woody: Sure. Oh, my Lord! Look at that thing! Fan: It's so huge. Woody: No, I've seen bigger. That's... Dr. Evil: Just a little prick.
The art of war between bureaucracy and plutocracy is to stay the hell out of court. The Com-cos who bill everyone for bandwidth have an edge where courts are involved. Justice loves issues controlling large piles of cash and power while indulging in their judicial self righteousness, which they adamantly deny. And they love wasting a few years to be sure that the coast is clear by the time they render a decision. It seems to me the FCC's calculation may be the preliminary groundwork to winning the edge against greedy evil scum shareholders. If authority is low, wait them out, retreat, regroup, and then come back after them later with both barrels loaded - A brand new bureaucracy: Homeland Neutrality - and instead of Coast Guard, they will be in the USPS and patrol in fleets of U.S. Mail jeeps and the pony express. It will resurrect the US Postal service. Also, anytime a politician lies on the wire or sells penis pills, its mail fraud. Lets be committed to results, and not dwell in protracted legal disputes. Lets back off the FCC, and them kick them in the balls with a surprise pseudo agency concoctions, and take back our entitlement to free swag for the masses, toll-free highways and superhighways, and free radio and cellular and wireless and satellite. If it moves through the air invisibly then its should not appear on a bill. Free electrons for an illuminated democracy
http://www.eff.org/ is IMHO a great place to begin dealing with old laws and new media and technology. They are like the ACLU for geeks, and aim to limit corporate or bureaucratic grip on internet and new media technologies. If the FCC or other government agency can't figure it out, then at least these very smart legal minds will watchdog these issues of the fine print: licensing, patents, privacy, fair use, etc.
Seems like they (Microsoft) have managed to continue flawed restore data loss in each new release. Ironically, it restores (through social engineering) our familiar role as beta testers that also get to (once again) pay for the privilege of a windows operating system loaded security concerns, flabby feature creepiness, and a corporate eula that is guaranteed to serve their interest and cost you time and money. We are subjected to this, repeatedly, in order to ease the headache of unnecessary risk, expense, and effort. All of this transparency is like living in a glass house, and we seem to have lost our stones. Gee, each new release its getting to be a ritual like a national or religious holiday. The tithe is more a mobster protection racket for your system and the life of the Motherboard and Godfather. Perhaps the Gates fund will one day heal malaria, but in the mean time they're hopelessly infected with "bugginess by design". The day they "cure" windows, it the day we stop buying it again and again like neurotic addicts chasing that elusive sense of clarity.
You can play hide and seek only if you add the "no bots" tag to your header, otherwise your soul gets indexed and cached. Would you like fries with that blue pill Neo?
...What me Worry? Why pretend? Privacy is a quaint self delusion - its nothing to hide any more. Let it all hang out. There's nothing too insignificant for the data stream, or the cyber-porta-potty. We're all registered text offenders.
I totally agree. Its a human nature thing. Like Elvis Costello sang it:
"History repeats the old conceits --
the glib replies the same defeats --
keep your finger on important issues --
with crocodile tears and a pocket full of tissues"
Slashdot Mirror
Where did you live that mongolian grill was $55 for nine people? That's like two people where I live...
No silly, its literally grilled Mongolian chow chow....they're cheep but chewy, dawg.
What do you mean?
"Because it is easier than doing the right thing" is the primary excuse for all crime, you silly non-sociopath.
Who steals because they have a great work ethic and its harder to do than spend cash?
Most File Sharers Hypothetically Say They would actually.... WATCH what they download, legal or otherwise. Mostly they just download compulsively so that they have the option to view it, maybe, if they ever get around to it. I personally can't afford paying my attention for stuff "good enough to swipe now and maybe watch later for free" But honestly, its the stuff I can't steel that's worth paying for presently that interests me enough to look at it now, and demands all my available viewer time. I never get around to wanting the "available" more than the scarce - when the selection exceeds mortality.
My solution... bit torrent. I would have gladly paid for it, or sat through a few Hulu commercials, but they simply don't make it available.
Fear not grasshopper, they got something more valuable: real statistical market data that reflects the willingness to delay gratification. Its easy to buy things on impulse, but its takes commitment to pursue and acquire inventory that is not for sale. I think they gather valuable information and gain insight into their customer and market.
To recap: The songs you hear on the radio are paid for by those commercials you hear between the songs. They are not free.
I understand your point, but let me point out an important distinction here. They don't pay a cent more if I turn on the radio and listen. Or if a million people do. That "paid for" song is exactly that, in the old paradigm: IT WAS PAID FOR. They didn't make you pay for it over and over again, or monitor who was listening, or whether they taped the "king biscuit flower hour" on KLOS. That fee agreement was an extortion settlement with broadcasters since they generate advertising revenues from others. It was lawsuit insurance protection payoff. But don't delude yourself into thinking that it "pays" for the song in the same way that it is in digital domains. What payed for music then was record sales - and that only happens if WE HEAR THE SONGS. That is why the record companies were giving PAYOLA that was 1000 times the ASCAP/BMI licensing agreements. When radio broadcast that song for 3 cents, it made NO DIFFERENCE to the cost, and it made NO ACCOUNTING if I or anyone had the radio on or off. It was a FLAT FEE. It also had no adjustment to the cost if I record it to a cassette tape. Copyright laws pertain to that situation in analog technology where ONE copy of a broadcast was ruled FAIR USE after Sony Beta arrived. BUT THE TERMS OFFERED TODAY ARE BY NO MEANS FAIR WHEN DRM ACCOUNTS FOR EVERY EAR AND DEVICE AD NAUSIUM and restricts your media and devices, and mines your market data. You can argue the moral relevance of apples and oranges, but bottom line is that the "piracy" that occurs is a direct response to the "rip off" greed that knows no bounds in the Corporate meat grinder. If the price for listening to the song is priced like it was in radio days - in other words, a flat nominal 3 cent fee PAID FOR the broadcast - no matter how many ears were tuned in or tape decks rolling, then there would be no need to "pirate". But the licensing arrangement proposed at this point of technology is preposterous, and I ain't paying, and nobody is going to buy if its not worth it. I am not stealing it either, I am just not a customer - not like I was when I felt I got what I paid for ONCE. Today, I'll occasionally buy tunes directly from the artists, at the concert, or on their web, but Sony and Universal Thorn EMI and Warner's Polydor, Apple, whatever can kiss my ass goodbye. Ultimately, a marketing plan that works will be the one that offers the bast value in the current social economic and cultural landscape. I've outgrown that demographic, I'm over that hill. But I really believe that the rip off is a two way street. "Pirates" are the "customers" once they decide they want to buy the product. These twits want to charge for the commercial, and only lend a license you intend to own. If it ain't worth stealing, it ain't worth paying for either, and nobody is hearing it at all. Given the choice of selling 1000 $1 tunes or a million pennies, the latter is always preferable, especially when its made out of a download of digital bandwidth. Its frigging electrons - and its prolific distribution is exactly what they want no matter how much they piss and moan about not getting paid enough. If that were really true, they would be dentists.
PIRACY involves the true (not imaginary)loss of actual monies specifically spent on the the stolen product, with cash from a real customer that goes to the PIRATE in exchange for stolen treasure, thus PIRACY.
Downloading media that is not generating revenue, nor taking actual cash dollars in exchange for stolen or counterfeit inventory, is just listening to tunes, like last century "hearing the music on the radio" was free bandwidth with copyright material that could be recorded off the air, sold the license or suggested piracy. It was Fair Use.
I have heard zillions of "stolen" songs on the radio and paid for zero - it never cost anyone a sale. However, I have spent many tens of thousands on music and concerts and media and swag and fashion, audio gear, etc... Nowadays, no more "old style" radio worth hearing, I use the streaming web, or mp3s or rip off ipods, which function like 20th century radio..like the free radio. I don't make disks, or duplicate and sell it, and it ain't piracy no matter how many times the greedy corporate scum executives of the entertainment industry rape and pillage, and have been robbing artists and customers revenue for years. Its their only skill. This is why nobody believes the whining of rich assholes anymore - they never cry when they grab the cash, only when they can't get everything from a supersaturated market.
....And with the usual 30 milliamp analog phone line current, it will only take about a dozen years to recharge each car.
Yeah, but think of all the roll over minutes!
Its the only way I can think of getting some value out of zillions of mini 6 x 6 lots with booth enclosure and electrical feeds.
Basil: Did we get Dr. Evil?
Radar Operator: No, sir, he got away in that big spaceship that looks like a huge...
Teacher: Penis. The male reproductive organ. Also known as tallywhacker, schlong, or...
Friendly Dad: Wiener? Any of your kids want another wiener?
Friendly Son: Dad, what's that?
Friendly Dad: I don't know, son, but it has great big...
Peanut Vendor: Nuts. Hot, salty nuts. Who wants some?...
Peanut Vendor: Lord Almighty!
Woman: That looks just like my husband's...
Circus Barker: ONE-EYED MONSTER. Step right up and see the One-eyed Monster!
Cyclops: RARRR.
Cyclops: Hey, what's that? It looks like a...
Fan: Woody. Woody Harrelson. Could I have your autograph?
Woody: Sure. Oh, my Lord! Look at that thing!
Fan: It's so huge.
Woody: No, I've seen bigger. That's...
Dr. Evil: Just a little prick.
The art of war between bureaucracy and plutocracy is to stay the hell out of court. The Com-cos who bill everyone for bandwidth have an edge where courts are involved. Justice loves issues controlling large piles of cash and power while indulging in their judicial self righteousness, which they adamantly deny. And they love wasting a few years to be sure that the coast is clear by the time they render a decision. It seems to me the FCC's calculation may be the preliminary groundwork to winning the edge against greedy evil scum shareholders. If authority is low, wait them out, retreat, regroup, and then come back after them later with both barrels loaded - A brand new bureaucracy: Homeland Neutrality - and instead of Coast Guard, they will be in the USPS and patrol in fleets of U.S. Mail jeeps and the pony express. It will resurrect the US Postal service. Also, anytime a politician lies on the wire or sells penis pills, its mail fraud. Lets be committed to results, and not dwell in protracted legal disputes. Lets back off the FCC, and them kick them in the balls with a surprise pseudo agency concoctions, and take back our entitlement to free swag for the masses, toll-free highways and superhighways, and free radio and cellular and wireless and satellite. If it moves through the air invisibly then its should not appear on a bill. Free electrons for an illuminated democracy
Okay, I'll believe that.
Deadhead Aphids always like their fungus for the visual effect.
Or just change the law. No more copyrights-patents.
http://www.eff.org/ is IMHO a great place to begin dealing with old laws and new media and technology. They are like the ACLU for geeks, and aim to limit corporate or bureaucratic grip on internet and new media technologies. If the FCC or other government agency can't figure it out, then at least these very smart legal minds will watchdog these issues of the fine print: licensing, patents, privacy, fair use, etc.
Seems like they (Microsoft) have managed to continue flawed restore data loss in each new release. Ironically, it restores (through social engineering) our familiar role as beta testers that also get to (once again) pay for the privilege of a windows operating system loaded security concerns, flabby feature creepiness, and a corporate eula that is guaranteed to serve their interest and cost you time and money. We are subjected to this, repeatedly, in order to ease the headache of unnecessary risk, expense, and effort. All of this transparency is like living in a glass house, and we seem to have lost our stones. Gee, each new release its getting to be a ritual like a national or religious holiday. The tithe is more a mobster protection racket for your system and the life of the Motherboard and Godfather. Perhaps the Gates fund will one day heal malaria, but in the mean time they're hopelessly infected with "bugginess by design". The day they "cure" windows, it the day we stop buying it again and again like neurotic addicts chasing that elusive sense of clarity.
....depends on a credit score and cash limit. I mean, er, um, Bob O Matic.
Blippy blew big bloopers before the bankruptcy blues...
You can play hide and seek only if you add the "no bots" tag to your header, otherwise your soul gets indexed and cached. Would you like fries with that blue pill Neo?
...What me Worry? Why pretend? Privacy is a quaint self delusion - its nothing to hide any more. Let it all hang out. There's nothing too insignificant for the data stream, or the cyber-porta-potty. We're all registered text offenders.
Super sized monthly charges will consume the consumers.
...not "file sharing"...
Starbucks is convenient for unemployment.
I totally agree. Its a human nature thing. Like Elvis Costello sang it: "History repeats the old conceits -- the glib replies the same defeats -- keep your finger on important issues -- with crocodile tears and a pocket full of tissues"
I just am so surprised. Its run by a bunch of government employees, and they are rarely faulty.
...Oh yeah. I always wondered what the heck everyone was talking about.....