Tech people are most likely the 5% of the people flooding the internet with P2P traffic which consumes 50% of bandwidth. Network neutrality is your (very targeted) subsidy, Why would anyone reading slashdot be against it?
I see the merit in your argument, namely, that people are now buying music who would not otherwise buy music. However, I can't see how DRM is unfavorable for the content provider.
Economics fleshs this out. If it were favorable for content providers to freely distribute content, then they would. And maybe they are. With what Universal plans to do with ad-supported, free content distribution, the business model is definatly changing. However, I'm not sure if they will make nearly as much money as they would if given enforced 100% copyright protection.
Don't get me wrong, I like what is happening here. If someone is making a killing off of someone else, there will be counter-vailing forces. I'm just saying I don't think content providers are evil for acting in their self interests, just like everyone else.
I think you are forgetting about the aspect of scale in your arguments.
For every song bought legally online, there are at least 20 illegally downloaded. Has this scenario ever been the case with tape copy or paper copy? The shear ease of copying has created a situation very different from the Photocopy/VCR situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Tech people are most likely the 5% of the people flooding the internet with P2P traffic which consumes 50% of bandwidth. Network neutrality is your (very targeted) subsidy, Why would anyone reading slashdot be against it?
I see the merit in your argument, namely, that people are now buying music who would not otherwise buy music. However, I can't see how DRM is unfavorable for the content provider. Economics fleshs this out. If it were favorable for content providers to freely distribute content, then they would. And maybe they are. With what Universal plans to do with ad-supported, free content distribution, the business model is definatly changing. However, I'm not sure if they will make nearly as much money as they would if given enforced 100% copyright protection. Don't get me wrong, I like what is happening here. If someone is making a killing off of someone else, there will be counter-vailing forces. I'm just saying I don't think content providers are evil for acting in their self interests, just like everyone else.
I think you are forgetting about the aspect of scale in your arguments. For every song bought legally online, there are at least 20 illegally downloaded. Has this scenario ever been the case with tape copy or paper copy? The shear ease of copying has created a situation very different from the Photocopy/VCR situation.