I'll pay marginal cost, or slightly above. With infinite supply, marginal cost is zero. Fix your prices to reflect reality instead of fantasyland, then I'll buy.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 31 May 2011 @ 11:14am
Re: Re: Re: Google does nothing because it is in Google's interests to do nothing.
Google is doing what is best for Google. Piracy is good for Google's business.
Are you the same Anonymous Coward that last week said that most "regular" users weren't pirating and sharing music?
For the sake of argument, let's say that piracy is good for Google's business (no idea if it really is or not, and you can't know for sure either). Doesn't it follow that piracy is not limited to just a few tech geeks? That the average user is more than likely participating in the sharing of culture? That your views that more copyright is always good is not the view of the majority? That suing and alienating the majority of your customer base is a bad thing?
How much cognitive dissonance can you really stand before your head explodes?
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 31 May 2011 @ 9:43am
Re: Re: arguments
McDonalds causes obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.
No argument on the first 3, though I think the evidence for cancer is equivocal. Interestingly though, McDs and other fast food places have been working to adapt to the changing market and offer additional choices that are more nutritious.
But still, brainwashing kids? Worse than all that combined.
Give me a choice, and I'd pick pretty much any disease that would impair my body over anything (disease or not) that would cause undue influence over my mind.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 May 2011 @ 2:50pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What an incredibly weak response.
You asked for personal examples. I supplied them. You have been asked many times for specific evidence or examples supporting your views, yet never, not once have supplied any. If I'm wrong, please direct me to those posts. Put up, or shut up.
The major labels aren't responsible for a DVD-copying software company being sued.
What law did MGM use to sue 321 Studios out of existence? The DMCA - specifically the anti-circumvention part. Who was the driving force behind that law in the 90s? The music labels.
Besides, the major labels, movie studios and game studios are all effectively the same monster. They have the same mindset, their execs all play musical chairs, they all lobby for the same things and are part of same and similar trade groups.
The major labels have nothing to do with a game manufacturer protecting their product.
Again, same mindset. The belief that in order to "protect IP" they need to (many times secretively) install software specifically designed to break functions of a computer. Who else does this? It couldn't be Sony, they would never install a rootkit, would they?
As far as downloading again, you bought one copy, why do you expect infinite copies? Why do you want to shift the burden to Apple because of *your* hardware problems?
Was actually my girlfriend's roommate's drive, but that's immaterial. Shift the burden? What burden? So Apple doesn't have a database of what users buy which tracks? They certainly had to have authentication servers with those lists when this happened, back in the AAC days. I expect infinite copies because that's what the internet allows at near zero cost. No extra effort and no extra cost to provide an excellent service for users stopped because of the label's fear. That's the whole point.
Mostly these personal examples are weak because I learned very early on not to pay money or waste time with broken products. Other people aren't so lucky. What happened to customers who bought products using Microsoft's "PlaysForSure" tech? They got screwed. Walmart's online music store? Screwed. I can't keep track of how many music stores and services that require authentication to tracks at certain points have failed. Rhapsody and Napster if they haven't failed yet, will. Users will be screwed. That's just music. Blu-ray players that are getting bricked or newer movies not playing on them? Users got screwed. All those Sony PSN users who couldn't even play single player or activate parts of their game when the network was down? Screwed. Dragon Age Origin players at launch? Screwed. blah. Screwed. blah blah. Screwed. blah. Screwed.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 May 2011 @ 12:08pm
Re: Re:
Masnick got so upset about civil rights violating unconstitutional legislation that in his rush to inform the public, he cut and paste the wrong list.
FTFY.
Break the internet?
I suppose you know more about DNS than a group of people who work with it every day for a living?
Authors: Steve Crocker, Shinkuro, Inc.
David Dagon, Georgia Tech
Dan Kaminsky, DKH
Danny McPherson, Verisign, Inc.
Paul Vixie, Internet Systems Consortium
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 May 2011 @ 7:53am
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You personally; examples please.
I, personally, have:
-Lost money when software I legally bought and paid for stopped working because the company which made it was sued out of existence (321 Studios).
-Spent hours of my own personal time rebuilding and reimaging my own and others people's computer that have been messed up by various forms of DRM (mostly screwed up installs of SecureROM).
-Spent 2 hours recovering someone's iTunes library when their hard drive died because of Apple's agreement with the labels to not allow redownloading of already paid for tracks.
Those are specific examples I can point to that have personally happened to me. Not in that list are theoretical savings of time and money that I was never able to have because the labels/studios killed off (or discouraged from even existing) products and services that would have benefited me.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 May 2011 @ 7:26am
Re: Re:
that they actually can control where these laws go to an extent.
Controlling the law isn't controlling reality. The illusion (delusion) of controlling politicians and the law doesn't mean you can control the tide.
Sure, those laws will have an effect. They'll manage to kill off some smart start-ups and throw some pirates in jail and alienate (sue) many of their customers. Maybe they'll even manage to break some of the foundations of the internet (and force it to adapt less breakable methods).
It won't last.
At some point, whether its in 2, 5, or 20 years, in order to hold on to their business models, they'll need some law that even our bought politicians will balk at. Maybe it will be jail time for downloaders. Maybe it will be to cut off diplomatic ties to a country that has created a data haven. Maybe it will be restrictions on speech that even the bought politician can see is truly a restriction. Or something else we can't quite imagine yet. But there is a limit.
Its not whether the legacy business model will survive, nor even how long they will survive - its whether the companies trying to survive will be able to make any semblance of a transition or will just collapse one day like Enron or Bear Stearns.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 May 2011 @ 1:29pm
Re: Re: Re:
that the problem is IP
It is the problem. The belief that you can own an infinitely copyable and infinitely transferable idea is crazy.
Abstract ideas (patents) and expressions (copyright) do not deserve monopoly protection from the government. Evidence shows that those protections are not necessary for the advancement of science or art, nor do they in practice compensate the actual artist or inventor. All they appear to do is create massive inefficient bureaucracies of middlemen and lawyers.
Just because something has been done one way for (only) the past 200 years does not mean it must be done that way.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 24 May 2011 @ 10:04am
Re: Be reasonable.
Don't think it would've mattered if the original included that or not. Its not like those surveyed would have understood what the word "reasonable" meant.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 23 May 2011 @ 1:48pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: A few extra questions
There have been cheap, easy and legal alternatives for years.
Really? Name one single legal place where I can buy any track with no hassle in multiple desirable formats at a price close to marginal cost.
It doesn't sound difficult, but since the legacy labels don't seem to get it, I'll have to spell out a good user experience.
Some definitions:
- buy - not lease or license, buy and download and keep indefinitely, legally transferable to someone else (if I delete my copies) as befits right of first sale
- any track - every single track the big labels have ever put out on a CD, regardless of country of origin, plus as many indy labels you can get, and unreleased and "rare" tracks and older analog recorded if possible a definite plus
- no hassle - all they need is my payment details, if I don't want to create a profile or supply an email address I don't have to - if I do supply personal info or create an account, being able to re-download files would be an obvious plus, as would good recommendations on other things I could be interested based on what I've downloaded, etc.
- desirable formats - DRM-less formats - high bitrate MP3s, FLAC or other lossless
- price - since the marginal cost of each string of ones and zeros is zero, being gouged $1 a track is truly absurd. We're talking about $0.01 a track, maybe $0.05 for a brand new release.
I can more or less get all that above for free. If I'm paying, your store needs to offer a better experience.
On the post: Streaming Music To Phones Is Officially The Oldest Trick In The Book
Re: Re: Re: Re: Well
Combining two things in an obvious way can be innovation. Modern mobile phones + old way to listen to music over a phone = mobile music streaming.
But just because it is innovation doesn't mean it deserves monopoly protection (patents).
On the post: Why PROTECT IP Breaks The Internet
Re:
You're a bit late to the party. October 2010:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101026/01311411586/the-revolution-will-be-distributed-wiki leaks-anonymous-and-how-little-the-old-guard-realizes-what-s-going-on.shtml
February 2011:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110201/17251712913/distributed-party-we-is-already-control .shtml
The industries are not dying,
Stage of Grief: Denial.
The demand has increased dramatically.
And the supply has increased infinitely.
They just don't want to pay.
I'll pay marginal cost, or slightly above. With infinite supply, marginal cost is zero. Fix your prices to reflect reality instead of fantasyland, then I'll buy.
On the post: The Maximalist Future: Be Sure To Pay Off Your Lawsuits Before Heading For The School Bus
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, that would never happen. No lawyer would sue a kid for downloading a song.
Oh, wait. They already have.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061219/121441.shtml
They've also sued dead people, then tried to get it transferred to the surviving family members. Is there that much of a stretch to not-yet-born?
On the post: With A Choice Between $100 Million In Cash & Fantasyland, The Labels Choose Fantasyland
Re: Re: Re: Google does nothing because it is in Google's interests to do nothing.
Are you the same Anonymous Coward that last week said that most "regular" users weren't pirating and sharing music?
For the sake of argument, let's say that piracy is good for Google's business (no idea if it really is or not, and you can't know for sure either). Doesn't it follow that piracy is not limited to just a few tech geeks? That the average user is more than likely participating in the sharing of culture? That your views that more copyright is always good is not the view of the majority? That suing and alienating the majority of your customer base is a bad thing?
How much cognitive dissonance can you really stand before your head explodes?
On the post: British Labels Propagandizing To Children
Re: Re: arguments
No argument on the first 3, though I think the evidence for cancer is equivocal. Interestingly though, McDs and other fast food places have been working to adapt to the changing market and offer additional choices that are more nutritious.
But still, brainwashing kids? Worse than all that combined.
Give me a choice, and I'd pick pretty much any disease that would impair my body over anything (disease or not) that would cause undue influence over my mind.
On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You asked for personal examples. I supplied them. You have been asked many times for specific evidence or examples supporting your views, yet never, not once have supplied any. If I'm wrong, please direct me to those posts. Put up, or shut up.
The major labels aren't responsible for a DVD-copying software company being sued.
What law did MGM use to sue 321 Studios out of existence? The DMCA - specifically the anti-circumvention part. Who was the driving force behind that law in the 90s? The music labels.
Besides, the major labels, movie studios and game studios are all effectively the same monster. They have the same mindset, their execs all play musical chairs, they all lobby for the same things and are part of same and similar trade groups.
The major labels have nothing to do with a game manufacturer protecting their product.
Again, same mindset. The belief that in order to "protect IP" they need to (many times secretively) install software specifically designed to break functions of a computer. Who else does this? It couldn't be Sony, they would never install a rootkit, would they?
As far as downloading again, you bought one copy, why do you expect infinite copies? Why do you want to shift the burden to Apple because of *your* hardware problems?
Was actually my girlfriend's roommate's drive, but that's immaterial. Shift the burden? What burden? So Apple doesn't have a database of what users buy which tracks? They certainly had to have authentication servers with those lists when this happened, back in the AAC days. I expect infinite copies because that's what the internet allows at near zero cost. No extra effort and no extra cost to provide an excellent service for users stopped because of the label's fear. That's the whole point.
Mostly these personal examples are weak because I learned very early on not to pay money or waste time with broken products. Other people aren't so lucky. What happened to customers who bought products using Microsoft's "PlaysForSure" tech? They got screwed. Walmart's online music store? Screwed. I can't keep track of how many music stores and services that require authentication to tracks at certain points have failed. Rhapsody and Napster if they haven't failed yet, will. Users will be screwed. That's just music. Blu-ray players that are getting bricked or newer movies not playing on them? Users got screwed. All those Sony PSN users who couldn't even play single player or activate parts of their game when the network was down? Screwed. Dragon Age Origin players at launch? Screwed. blah. Screwed. blah blah. Screwed. blah. Screwed.
All for imaginary property.
On the post: The 18 Senators Who Approve Breaking The Internet To Protect Hollywood
Re: Re:
FTFY.
Break the internet?
I suppose you know more about DNS than a group of people who work with it every day for a living?
Authors: Steve Crocker, Shinkuro, Inc.
David Dagon, Georgia Tech
Dan Kaminsky, DKH
Danny McPherson, Verisign, Inc.
Paul Vixie, Internet Systems Consortium
Your credentials? Put up or shut up.
On the post: Ron Wyden: Puts Hold On PROTECT IP, Temporarily Withdraws Amendment On The PATRIOT Act
Ron Wyden 2012!
Write ins FTW.
On the post: Opera Reads & Responds To Oprah's Mail
Semi-popular
What I think you meant was:
-Not very popular browser software
-Browser about as popular as OS/2
On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I, personally, have:
-Lost money when software I legally bought and paid for stopped working because the company which made it was sued out of existence (321 Studios).
-Spent hours of my own personal time rebuilding and reimaging my own and others people's computer that have been messed up by various forms of DRM (mostly screwed up installs of SecureROM).
-Spent 2 hours recovering someone's iTunes library when their hard drive died because of Apple's agreement with the labels to not allow redownloading of already paid for tracks.
Those are specific examples I can point to that have personally happened to me. Not in that list are theoretical savings of time and money that I was never able to have because the labels/studios killed off (or discouraged from even existing) products and services that would have benefited me.
On the post: John Perry Barlow Tells Copyright Maximalists That They've Got The Fundamentals Wrong
Re: Re:
Controlling the law isn't controlling reality. The illusion (delusion) of controlling politicians and the law doesn't mean you can control the tide.
Sure, those laws will have an effect. They'll manage to kill off some smart start-ups and throw some pirates in jail and alienate (sue) many of their customers. Maybe they'll even manage to break some of the foundations of the internet (and force it to adapt less breakable methods).
It won't last.
At some point, whether its in 2, 5, or 20 years, in order to hold on to their business models, they'll need some law that even our bought politicians will balk at. Maybe it will be jail time for downloaders. Maybe it will be to cut off diplomatic ties to a country that has created a data haven. Maybe it will be restrictions on speech that even the bought politician can see is truly a restriction. Or something else we can't quite imagine yet. But there is a limit.
Its not whether the legacy business model will survive, nor even how long they will survive - its whether the companies trying to survive will be able to make any semblance of a transition or will just collapse one day like Enron or Bear Stearns.
On the post: Singer's Ex-Boyfriend Demands Royalties For Inspiring Songs About Their Relationship & Breakup
Re: Re: Re:
It is the problem. The belief that you can own an infinitely copyable and infinitely transferable idea is crazy.
Abstract ideas (patents) and expressions (copyright) do not deserve monopoly protection from the government. Evidence shows that those protections are not necessary for the advancement of science or art, nor do they in practice compensate the actual artist or inventor. All they appear to do is create massive inefficient bureaucracies of middlemen and lawyers.
Just because something has been done one way for (only) the past 200 years does not mean it must be done that way.
On the post: US Copyright Group Breaks Its Own Record; Sues 24,583 For Allegedly Sharing Hurt Locker
Re:
I guess Google's Public DNS server enjoys movies to.
It must be buddies with that network printer at a university that has ended up in a cease and desist.
On the post: Google Ditches Newspaper Archival Effort... To Help Publishers Charge For Online Content
Re: You want the content, but dont care if the content creaters cease to exist. !!! smart..
Everyone needs their daily amount of vegetables.
Mmmm. Spinach.
On the post: Please Help Us Figure Out How Much The Public Has 'Lost' Due To Overprotective Anti-Copy Laws
Re: Be reasonable.
On the post: The War On Sharing As An Infographic Of Europe
Re:
Funniest thing I've read all day. Admittedly, its only 9:13AM here.
On the post: Why Operation In Our Sites Is Illegal And Needs To Be Fixed ASAP
Re: Re: Re: Re: A few extra questions
Really? Name one single legal place where I can buy any track with no hassle in multiple desirable formats at a price close to marginal cost.
It doesn't sound difficult, but since the legacy labels don't seem to get it, I'll have to spell out a good user experience.
Some definitions:
- buy - not lease or license, buy and download and keep indefinitely, legally transferable to someone else (if I delete my copies) as befits right of first sale
- any track - every single track the big labels have ever put out on a CD, regardless of country of origin, plus as many indy labels you can get, and unreleased and "rare" tracks and older analog recorded if possible a definite plus
- no hassle - all they need is my payment details, if I don't want to create a profile or supply an email address I don't have to - if I do supply personal info or create an account, being able to re-download files would be an obvious plus, as would good recommendations on other things I could be interested based on what I've downloaded, etc.
- desirable formats - DRM-less formats - high bitrate MP3s, FLAC or other lossless
- price - since the marginal cost of each string of ones and zeros is zero, being gouged $1 a track is truly absurd. We're talking about $0.01 a track, maybe $0.05 for a brand new release.
I can more or less get all that above for free. If I'm paying, your store needs to offer a better experience.
On the post: Universal Music: We Need PROTECT IP Because Musicians Are Dying!
Re: Damn pirates
Also, we now have:
But, but... death!
On the post: RIAA Two Top Execs Made $4.8 Million In 2009; How Many Musicians Could That Have Funded?
Re: Re: Re: So... someone take advantage of this?
No argument there - but those are jobs for a label or manager. Not some non-profit(lol) trade group that works to further corrupt our government.
On the post: RIAA Two Top Execs Made $4.8 Million In 2009; How Many Musicians Could That Have Funded?
Re: So... someone take advantage of this?
Next >>