Ericsson Recognizes That 'Piracy' Isn't The Problem, But A Symptom Of Failed Business Models
from the good-for-them dept
Just about a week ago, I stated:The folks in the industry (and the politicians who support them) keep thinking that the problem is "piracy." And if they just got rid of these "freeloaders," the business model solves itself. That is, they look at infringement as the problem, and business model problems as the symptoms. They've got it backwards. The problem is the business model. The infringement is the symptom -- showing that they haven't yet adapted. If you look at the history of infringement, it's the same thing every time: it's always been a leading indicator of industry not adapting fast enough.Apparently, I'm not the only one thinking that way. Rene Summer, Director of Government and Industry Relations at Ericsson, has more or less said the same thing:
"File-sharing is a symptom of a problem, rather than a problem in itself. This problem is the inadequate availability of legal, timely, competitively priced and wide-ranging choices of affordable digital-content offerings. Consumers also expect to be able to make decisions freely regarding when and how to consume the content of their choice. By clinging to outdated business methods such as windowing and territoriality, economic-rights holders are in fact creating the consumer behavior against which they so violently protest."Is this the point where I whine about being ripped off? I'm trying to understand how that works...
More seriously, it's good that this concept is getting some traction. Once you realize that "piracy" is a symptom of an unsatisfied consumer base, you begin to recognize that it's often the leading indicator for innovation. That's because it shows you what consumers want, and satisfying the desires of consumers is where innovation comes from.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business model, piracy, symptom
Companies: ericsson
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
If so, I imagine this guy will get his walking papers pretty damn quick.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Market Economy
Piracy PROVES the content markets are currently UN-satisfied. New distribution models like Netflix are the future but are only scratching the surface. The true potential will only become clear once Netflix is no longer RESTRICTED to US only users!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sort of a no brainer from there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Or did you not even bother looking up Ericsson's business?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
Yes, but different. Sony-Ericsson is a separate company that is (not surprisingly) a joint venture of the two companies. But it people at Sony Ericsson are not the bosses of folks at Ericsson.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Such a fun tack to take.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Momentum is hard to stop. Societal momentum is doubly difficult to stop. Once people are patterned into a way of doing things it takes a generation to remove that patterning. No laws, warnings, or educational programs can change that.
What you have in the content industry is a large amount of political momentum, and an expanding locked out system. It is locked out because it continues to press for laws to limit any competition. These laws continue to get narrower and narrower in scope. These laws lock out what the little room they have to maneuver. The political momentum is pushing this forward.
Imagine 50,000 people with the same false belief that infringement is the root cause of all their problems. People who do not see that everything they are doing is causing their own demise. Now picture 50,000 lemmings ... who can't change course, who shout down anyone with a dissenting opinion, all rushing forward not noticing where they are headed.
Enter the evil infringer. This is the customer who is always wrong in the eyes of the content industry. This is the consumer who is underserved. This is the 85% of people who said no matter what they would continue infringing. This is the average person fed up with any sort of new regulation.
You have two momentums clashing, if you look at the bigger picture.
One that is locked into its course because of a00 years of fear of competition. That will do anything to maintain its control.
The other momentum, is a set of underserved customers who are becoming very upset at being spoken down to, and told every thing they want is wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
and therefore involved.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
We all have skin on the matter since IP laws are so intrusive and affect everybody.
Go on keep thinking that only content producer have a stake, everybody else will just prove you wrong at every turn.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How soon until his bosses
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If anything, Ericsson and other telecommunication equipment makes would have a vested interest in seeing the continued spread of piracy, as it is a boost for network traffic and drives demand for the products that they do sell.
I think that Mike hit it exactly right, it appears that he he took a statement from one of the leaders of the "piracy is good" movement, and pretty much just repeated it word for word. I am not clear that it really adds anything.
I would also point out that it isn't Ericsson as a company that "gets it", just a single employee.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Remember: They pirate the content because it is popular, it isn't popular because it was pirated. Once you understand that basic fact, you realize that piracy is in the end very much self defeating. It's the strip mining of culture, such that there is nothing left to mine in future generations.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You are part of the extremism of the other side as Ericsson suggest and set up a virtual police state and regulate the Internet with an iron fist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Why make me wait 6 months for a book when it's available in the US or make me pay twice as much for a movie because I have to buy from the Region 2 zone even though a digital download is region less?
'kin morons these large corps are, they are their own worst enemy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MP3
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MP3
Well I won't be... I've bought them on vinyl, I moved to tape, I then bought the CD and finally the MP3. I have FLAC and other lossless versions I've "obtained" from other sources... so sorry artists that I love I won't be buying the albums again, not that this will affect you as the % you'll get from downloads will be so little that it will just about buy you a cup of coffee and a bagel.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
It's always good to see the citation accompany the accusation - Bravo.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Sort of reflects your attitude doesn't it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
None needed when you have 'skin in the game'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I guess all those people that shared video tapes were hurting culture.
All those people that loved the Grateful Dead so they only toured and allowed videos.
All the Youtube remixes of songs, adding value...
The growth of anime translators for accurate subtitles of anime...
Spotify...
Yep, all piracy is self defeating.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
See that bolded part? THAT is what should be focussed on by businesses, rather than crying into their brown envelopes for politicians.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: MP3
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Example: Jane wants to download a copy of [insert title here] and watch it on her phone. Rights holders won't sell her a download. Jane still wants it. Jane happens to find it, and at a great price.
In this example, what do you think will happen?
If the rights holders had sold Jane what she wanted to pay for at step 1, what would have happened?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Learning is hard!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
OIC.
Only people with outdated 'skin' in the game produce 'real' music worth spending money on. I like several of these garage bans and keyboard plunkers and in my opinion, the "popular", major-label funded music really can't die fast enough.
You act as though only the old system could produce quality music and that piracy will leave us with nothing but the bottom of the barrel. For many people out there (far more than you estimate), the artists, labels and industry heads complaining about piracy the most are cranking out the music these people want least.
If you've ever thought you might have heard someone refer to you as an "insufferable prick," it was probably due to your condescending attitude towards amateur artists.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: MP3
The times that worked best were when we had a lot of record labels doing various things to keep their artists happy. When Motown started up, I am willing to bet they gave the people more than %50 percent of record sales. They answered a song with another on the radio.
Look at the industry now...
We have payola controlling what is played on the radio.
We have copyright saying that we can't play a song more than three times per hour.
Indie artists have a hard time getting screen time other than the internet.
Indie movies going through the MPAA machine are barely played outside of Sundance.
This is what copyright has wrought? A splintering of people to discuss the laws rather than enjoy their entertainment? The best thing that could have happened is Napster be allowed to thrive as the consumer base saw fit. Instead, all of us watch these businesses complain about piracy instead of looking at their bottom line.
But you know, there is some silver linings. With the advent of the digital era, the importance of Performance Rights Organizations is going down. Link. I downright hate the tactics that ASCRAP does and it's great to see the writing on the wall for their legalized extortion schemes.
One day, we'll actually have legislation that makes sense. Legislation that protects the consumers from IP lookups, misguided attempts at regulating their use of the internet and trying to limit what people talk about.
Until then, we'll have the same groupthink of people that believe the world is all about "freetardism", not understanding the actual arguments and frustrations of people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Your statements are all 100% extremist. You entirely miss the concepts of "world wide hit" and "popular the world over". Remove the mechanism by which this happens, and you have, well, regional, national, perhaps even county by county music and movie industries. It's a shift.
Sure, there will be some international hits, some things will be known worldwide. Sort of like Chocolate Rain or that young asian girl singing lady gaga. Oh, wait, no, that won't work, because nobody will know who Lady Gaga is, so the girl will be singing something few people care about.
I don't have an attitude towards amateur artist. I think they are amateur for two good reasons: time and money. They don't have enough of either when they are busy doing the 9 to 5 (or 11 to 7 night shift), trying to take care of personal matters, and perhaps getting a couple of hours a week to sit down to make music. On that scale, they should turn out a U2 or Coldplay level hit in about, what, 200 years? They might get lucky earlier, but will anyone ever really know?
I think you are being the "insufferable prick," considering that you don't seem to think that the music industry has produced anything of note, and doesn't have any marketing power or skills.
Then again, you are one of Mike's pets, so I have to assume that being a prick about that is pretty much a requirement!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I like how you accuse him of moving to extremes when you immediately take up an argument akin to "IF WE DON'T SATISFY THE RECORD COMPANIES WE WILL BE BASHING STONES TOGETHER IN A CAVE ON THE GREAT PLANESCAPE OF THE RECORD INDUSTRY APOCALYPSE". But no, no, this isn't an extreme, unsupportable position to think that somehow we are going to revert to a tribal society in terms of music and that nothing will ever become popular all over the world ever again. I'm sure it's a perfectly rational line of thought because the internet is big, mean, and scary. Made of ruthless savages and untameable wolfmen.
What you're saying is that people have to be told what to buy and that is the only way for various artists and the record industry to succeed. It isn't sufficient enough to believe that people will listen to what they like. Buck, I know you've been detached from reality for quite some time, but you should know better than this.
Oh and I like how you use "Lady Gaga" as an example, an artist who became extremely popular by using the internet instead of holing up inside of a record company, fighting any attempt to put her music out to the public.
Of course anything I say isn't going to sway you from your hell-bent position of "EVERYTHING THAT IS FREE IS EVIL AND A LEECH ON SOCIETY". I'm honestly not even sure why you read this site. Or use the internet for that matter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Learning is hard!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I didn't miss that concept. That's the old system, which still thinks that in order to be successful, you have to be an international sensation. The regional system is not only more likely, but also preferable. Everybody starts from the bottom, even US/Coldplay.
I just don't agree that being a globetrotting multimillionaire is the aim of every small-time musician, nor should it be. When you shift the argument in that direction, it makes it easier for you to claim that piracy has killed the music business because if X musician isn't at the top of the charts or selling millions, then X musician is a victim of piracy. I'm not the one being extremist here.
And as for your claim that you don't have an attitude toward amateur artists? That's bullshit. In your own words, they'll never make it to the U2/Coldplay level. That's your standard for success and talent. That's not everybody's.
And this is the argument that gets used over and over again. If thousands of bands aren't vying for the "Richest Band in the World" slot, then piracy has destroyed music. It's a dodge and it's cheap and we've seen it here a million times before. Thousands of bands never made it to the top of the heap pre-piracy. Thousands of amateurs still had day/night jobs pre-piracy.
I think you are being the "insufferable prick," considering that you don't seem to think that the music industry has produced anything of note, and doesn't have any marketing power or skills.
Then again, you are one of Mike's pets, so I have to assume that being a prick about that is pretty much a requirement!
I didn't say any of that (although I did imply the "prick" thing). I didn't say the music industry hasn't produced anything of note or doesn't have marketing power. I said that they're not nearly as important as they or their defenders think they are. You're the one clinging to the old model, claiming that because it has failed (or is failing) that we'll be stuck with inferior music. That's just not true.
The music industry had marketing power and skills, but they've allowed those to rust in favor of honing their legislative skills via lobbying.
And as for your last dig: I've been called worse by commenters with actual names.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Welcome to the club.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"you are one of Mike's pets"
lmao, the irony is palpable
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So by nature, bands / artists have to either expand their horizons or get amazing in house gigs in places like Vegas to make those sort of dates in order to be in music full time. (Basic math, sell 100 seats a night, 200 nights a year, at $10 a seat, netting about $2 a seat, making you 40k a year before tax).
There will be exceptional cases (which are often pointed to here), but the numbers just don't really add up otherwise.
There is no issue of vying for "richest band in the world", that crap doesn't matter. It's all a question of having large enough exposure and large enough following to be able to play enough dates to pay the bills, make a living, and build up a retirement fund.
The other alternative (more likely) is that we end up with a very regional music scene, with numbers of small bar band types who release stuff online for free, hoping to get better bar gigs. Higher end arena shows are left to the few remaining big stars of the past, who as they retire, pretty much end the era.
The music industry doesn't cling to an old model, they are sticking with the only model that actually works on scale. Since nobody has produced a business model that is actually functional on the same scale, they have no reason to move. Once you understand that, you can understand where they are.
As for the dig, I only call out people who are worthy, and are actually debating and thinking. Being one of Mike's pricks is way better than being RD.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you wish to rate success as multi-platinum albums then that's your problem but frankly I don't listen to those artists and I couldn't give a shit if you can't afford a brand new Ferrari, if you rate success at earning enough money to live comfortably so that you can continue to do what you love then that's someone I might just wanna listen to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They can rate success differently, but it means that when they are 40, they will likely be working in someone else's office dreaming of being rock stars, rather than being rock stars.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not about hits, it's about being well known and enjoyed. "Hits" are sort of a product of that, getting exposed enough to actually get a big enough following. That isn't going to happen when you are trying to yell over 100,000 other artists all trying to do the same thing on facespace.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Artists based in Lisbon, Portugal have the same global reach as Akon, the thing they lack is "awareness" but even that is being eroded with free music sites and video hosting, I've given up counting the number or artists and bands that I've come across from those sorr of sites.
But like I said the artists and bands I love don't care about Akon or Coldplay, in fact most would describe them as the "idiot drones of corporation music" I mentioned in response to your post.
Success and guages of it are shifting, the old style recording industries definitions will pass and hopefully the remnents of the industry with it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
There was a game released in Japan only. It was called Final Fantasy II. It was never released in Europe for the original console (the FAMICOM/NES, for those who are sondering.)
It took nearly twenty years and massive amounts of fan pressure before it was released - On the PSX.
That not enough for you? Okay then, what about Xenoblade? It was originally slated for release in the Japanese Region 1 and Europe. Then fans got involved and flat-out told Nintendo America that if it wasn't available in the US, it was going to be pirated. The result? A release date in the US.
Having different region codes is idiotic now, when there are things that transcend borders.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I also refer you to the curious case of N-Dubz, an actual garage group who are becoming wealthier gradually and gaining worldwide recognition. And as for GaGa, she amuses me more for the outrageous dresses than her music, yet I still keep coming back for more, like the bankers to governments.
Why not be happy with a modest wage (of around �40k/year)? That's still much higher than the national working average over here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Irony at its best
Let's take a moment and try to explain it in plain English. Stating that infringement is a symptom and that the business model is the the problem; IS NOT, i repeat, IS NOT stating that "piracy" (infringement) is ok.
So for all of the commenters that began with their tirade against the pro-piracy movement, you seem to have no clue what you are talking about. The argument is not about pro-piracy, but rather that the faults in the business model actually encourage infringement. Thus, those who are anti-piracy are actually pro-piracy.
So its not the freetards causing the problem but rather the major stakeholders in the content industry who are pro-piracy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That is you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Besides, the age of a handful superstars everyone know about is dying. Its becoming too easy and too cheap to produce music for that phenomena to continue.
You will have to yell over not hundreds of thousands, but tens of millions other artists, and pretty soon. Piracy or no piracy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Learning is hard!
Sure you can. You just make your money with lawsuits instead. In fact, it's even easier than competing in the market place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
Citation, please.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
We dont need no stinkin citations.
We got skin in da game!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Guy 1: "Hey, if we charge $15 for one download or $2.50 for 10 downloads or $.50 for 30 downloads we still make the same amount of money."
Guy 2: No no no no, wrong. If we charge $15 that is way more money.
Guy 1: But who can afford that.
Guy 2: No I don't think you get it. .50 x 30 = $15. and 30 x $15 = $450. That's 3000% more.
Guy 1: But who will buy our crappy movies for $15?
Guy 2: Quality doesnt matter, that is what movies are worth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Response to: fogbugzd on Jul 1st, 2011 @ 10:13pm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So once you say "I want to be a professional musician", you have to look at how you would accomplish it. For those people who choose to make modern music (rock, pop, dance, rap, etc), the only real methods out there are selling your music, selling concert tickets, and selling "stuff" as a result of the first two.
It is wonderfully cheap to promote music, and it has been for years. The Beatles did miracles with a 4 track, and that same technology was for sale to the public since the mid 70s. The ability to record at the level of the best has been around for 20+ years already, and that still hasn't changed anything.
It's easy to record, it's hard to get people to actually pay attention. A wonderful recording of crap is still crap, a wonderful recording of perfection that is ignored or unheard is on par with the crap. Music isn't just about music, in the same manner that building websites isn't just about buying a domain name and typing "hello world" into frontpage. We all have the tools, few of us will ever be good with them.
Marketing, promotion, exposure, worldwide reach, and the ability to market in many countries in many languages on a local level are what really makes things happen. Most local bands will never have that ability, and that pretty much makes them local to where they are.
The tens of millions is just the noise floor rising. It doesn't drown out the superstars, it just drowns out each other.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: AC #63
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There is nothing extreme about that, only an observation.
But hey, nice attempt to deflect the discussion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Learning is hard!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or to Paraphrase:
"Every musician that is not signed to a major label is a largely talentless dilletante just messing about with music tin their spare time when they can be bothered."
WOW is that soooo accurate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I can't help myself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You might want to read this then. Mike doesn't agree but it was worth discussing. Or maybe you can show us your blog?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Wait, doesn't that mean that you're admitting you do have a direct stake (i.e. a paid shill or clueless IP holder unable to compete in the modern world)? I think it does...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Erm, if it's not available by legal means, what exactly is being lost by downloads? The only thing lost by "piracy" is a lost sale - how can this be lost if it's not available to begin with?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Masnick madly spinning !!! ('unstated' = make it up yourself).
Comment:
"masnick is now madly spinning away claiming that the right to terminate someone under the agreement is "unstated" but that an ISP can terminate someone if they so choose. That's quite different than the deliberately misleading bullshit in his article.
The White House, EFF, CDT and Public Knowledge were all part of this document. Any one of them would set the building on fire before allowing termination. No one from the studio side supports termination, hell even I am opposed to termination of an individual's service as the last step in a graduated response. This is simply lies and fear mongering calculated to advance Masnick's personal agenda."
It's nice to see Mike refering to his older (but inaccurate) posts as confirmation as his present, (equally inaccurate) post.
Mike, you need to NOT take lessons from that idiot that run's 'boycott novell'. It is ***NOT*** a good look...
People want you to refer back to their own works for one simple reason, that if the reader decides to find out the REAL facts, and cut through Mike's spin and often outright lies, then you find the truth to be a great deal different to how mike filters it through his own clear bias.
"unstated" = "i dont really have a clue, but I think that is what you want to hear, so I will just make shit up" (for page views).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Diametrically opposed opinions - - Mike you were not 'ripped off'.
But really Mike, you need to be a little carefull putting two statements side by side (or one above the other) and then proudly claiming "he said just what I said"!
You might get some people actually READ what both your said and what summers's said.
They will find that what summers said is diametrically opposed to what you are claiming he is stating!
And that is a problem for you, or it should be.
You are stating in your little snippet the following:
The music industry is failing because they are using old and outdated business models.
Correct me if I am wrong on that, you said:
"They've got it backwards, The problem is the business model".
At least on that one point you and summer's agree.
Now, Mike I am aware you like to keep things simplistic and shallow here, to cater to your target demographic, but lets dig a little deeper shall we? for those who might want to think for themselves for a refreshing change!
That is, they look at infringement as the problem, and business model problems as the symptoms.
What does that mean Mike, lets try to make things a bit clear, so enough of the double talk.
How does that statement make any logical sense at all?
Infringement HAS to be the symptom, the symptom is "what it is that is wrong, or causing the problem".
If you are sneezing that is a sympton, and an indication that you might have a cold.
The problem is you have a cold, the symptom of that cold is you sneeze
Infringement is not the symptom, it is the problem, the busines model is still the business model, right or wrong it has nothing really to do with infringement, or little to do with it.
As the people who are willing to infringe are not working within that business model, so to say it is that business model's fault is largely incorrect.
You CAN lay claim to business model faults if it affects those who are working within that model. But not those (infringers) who are willing to bypass the business model regardless of what it is.
Now, if you read what Rene Summer says:
He is saying that the tried and true, good old, what we've always normally had, business model is what we need
He is also saying that is not what the music industry presently is in Europe.
Tell me Mike or ANYONE !!! what is what with this business model:
availability of legal, timely, competitively priced and wide-ranging choices of affordable [incert -- product or servies] offerings.
Now Mike, read that and tell me where you said that ?
The infringement is the symptom -- showing that they haven't yet adapted. If you look at the history of infringement, it's the same thing every time: it's always been a leading indicator of industry not adapting fast enough.
Adapting ?? to what ??
"the availability of legal, timely, competitively priced and wide-ranging choices of affordable 'products/services' offerings."
Lets hope many (every) company 'adapts' that amazing, new and innovative business model !!
But Mike, YOU do not say that, you launch into a complex word game trying to confuse 'symptom' and 'problem' and somehow relate that to 'business model' with no real reference or logic applied.
All you said is "it's the business model stupid", then you say 'see Rene Summer is "business model" too so I must be right.
Then for some unknown reason you decide to take us on a history lesson,, (or at least mention the word 'history' again with no reference to anything, or argument you are trying to support with your 'historical' tangent.
Why dont you should us some examples of an industry that is not continuously adapting to new and varied markets and economic structures ?
Everyone adapts, all business models evolve and adapt with changing markets and market conditions, changing economies, demand, supply etc.
Sure, they might not adapt in the exact way Mike thinks they should or that Mike would like to see, but to say therefore they are not adapting is wrong.
It's just that they are, but Mike does not like the way they do it, and of course Mike knows best, So if Mikes does not agree with it, it just MUST be wrong, or they are not doing it in the first place.
when clearly, all industries including the music industry is adapting in many different ways.
Rene Summers can see that, and he is stating that how they are adapting is not the best way for them to go (in his opinion), but Mike you are in denial, you are saying "they dont adapt at all'.
Rene is saying, they should go back to their old ways and Mike is saying their old ways did not work, and neither does their new ways. (or that they are still applying the old ways).
So which is it ??
Mike is telling me they are not adapting, and Rene is telling me that are adapting but not the right way, and that they should go back to the old ways, "historically".
Mike is saying that historically they have always had this problem, and Rene is saying that they would not have this problem if they went back to the old ways they used to historically do !!!.
That is:
availability of legal, timely, competitively priced and wide-ranging choices of affordable digital-content offerings.
Rene says:
"File-sharing is a symptom of a problem, rather than a problem in itself."
Mike Says:
The problem is the business model. The infringement is the symptom
You see Mike Rene is saying "file-sharing is a symptom of a problem
And he is correct, file-sharing is a problem, it is clearly defined and known as a problem.
Just like sneezing is the symptom of a cold, or bank robbery is a symptom of poor security, or falling over is a symptom of running too fast.
They are all 'problems' but more importantly is the 'cause' of the problem.
Here again Mike, it appears you shoot but totally miss any point or conclusion.
Mike what would you do when you encountered a symptom to a problem ? I would guess you would adapt to overcome that symptom.
If you got a cold and the symptom is a cough, you might go to bed and eat chicken soup.
If you fall over when you run too fast, you might not run that fast next time, you adapt and you change your habbits.
The way you adapt to different problems is rarly the same way someone else would adapt to those set of cercumstances, but you make the claim that if they do not adapt the way you want them too then they are not adapting at all.
Then somehow magically relate that to the business model, sure the business model might not be perfect, but it is changing and adapting, as Rene Summers clearly stated.
Rene states they ARE and HAVE adapted but not in the right way (they introducted 'windowing and territoriality') that is an ADAPTATION that Rene does not agree with, then he clearly states they should go back to the old tried and proven business model, or proving legal, timely, competative........ product...
Is this the point where I whine about being ripped off? I'm trying to understand how that works...
Me too !!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
It's not even that. It may be a lost *potential* sale, in some cases. But many artists are finding that it's not even that and actually helps them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sheeesh...
2. Enough with the Anonymous posting. Get a login a be identified!
3. Enough with the "have skin on the matter" that's about as cool as saying synergy and the like.
4. Happy 4th of July. While I celebrate my homeland, I respect yours!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's about more than just petty robber barons.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Irony! The Irony!
They freely admit to this.
Being able to get yourself a touring gig is probably much more important. Probably was the case even back in the days when the major labels were at their heyday.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sheeesh...
Heh, what a hypocrite, as if being logged in means you aren't anonymous. I checked out killscar's own "profile". It doesn't include identity information and seems that the account was newly created for that comment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Sheeesh...
I do apologize for not properly filling out my user data but I frequently use this handle for other purposes so I am not trying to hide anything, it's on the Google. Thanks for the negativity!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sheeesh...
Ummm, because he's a douchebag?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Sheeesh...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Sheeesh...
Sometimes you reap what you sow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
> except pro-piracy and anti-regulation?
Yep, you got it right.
When Alexander first called Watson and invented the telephone, the foremost thing on his mind was how he could keep people from talking on the phone and thus reducing the primary purpose of the new invention: Piracy!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How soon until his bosses "restate" what he "meant"?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pirates again.
Everything is the pirates fault.
Only who are these pirates? People that can't find and play anything after mere seconds of searching online? Kids that don't have a credit card?
As much as I read you'd think there would people with mobile devices plugged in and playing 27/7.
No doubt it's a good bet that not every single sliver of content has been bought and paid for but that is not new.
Not for us regular folk.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Sheeesh...
and always you do not reap what you do now sow, and sometimes some theif will come and reap what you hav sowed before you can reap it.
Then Mike will do all he can to make it sound like it is ok to reap what someone else sow what you reap.
Especially when you clearly are not capable of sow'ing yourself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not a Douchebag, just confused...
Now come on !!! I would not say Mike is a douchebag !!! that is a very nastly thing to say.
NO, Mike might be alot of things, biased, hypocritical, nieve, uninformed and unable to comprehend any of the issues he claims 'expertise' in, and sure he has never been able to display in any practical way that what he says is in any way relative to reality,
But a 'douchebag' !!!!!
Mike probably is a very nice person, and I am sure if he could get over his habbit of bending the truth, and making things up, then I am sure many other people will also see him for what he is... (whatever that happens to be).
Mike has a 'business model' that he is trying to create and support, Mikes busines model is to make money from the application off his intellectual property!!!!
This in itself is a source of amuzement as the majority of his works are on the subject that intellectual property has no value, (except of course that is who Mike makes a living).
So apart from "Mike" (and everyone else on the planet), IP has not value according to TAM (The angelic Mike).
I guess that is why some people consider Mike to be a false profit, he peaches "DO not worship the IP God, and do not see that I worship the IP God"..
(some people state that as; "Do as I say, not as I do".)
This speaks to your credability Mike, but to say you are therefore a douchebag, is a bit harsh, or may be he just knows you better than I do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]