Re: The producers got what they paid for then... now want more.
That may be true... but who could have anticipated DVDs and the popularity of TV series on DVD when negotiating licensing deals in the 70s and 80s?
People just want their culture, keeping it from them for such frivolous reasons is stupid.
But I guess it just goes to show how inept and incompetent entertainment lawyers are that deals can't be done to get these shows released in a timely manner in their original form.
if the internet is such a great mechanism, why are we not seeing any breakthrough artists or shows?
Things don't happen over night. I think it's only a matter of time before we start seeing breakthrough artists. But it may be a few years before that happens.
"From my perspective, the idea that someone feels entitled to rip off anything and everything they want, just because they want it, shows just how far down our society has plunged."
Really?
It's interesting that a few people here are focusing on the sharing between music fans. But, ignoring the idea of sharing between artist and fan.
The article makes the following comment (I think it's Mike, but everything is italics so it's unclear).
"There's plenty of work in behavioral economics that shows we classify transactions as either "social" or "economic". We apply different standards to each. The social realm is all about reciprocity and trust, while the economic realm is all about value and rules."
I think the key to understanding what's going on with file-sharing is understanding the above. Music fans are fans of music and the artists that create it. Music is culture, communication. It's a social interaction. Music fans don't view their relationship with artists as economic.
During the 20th century, there was only one way to own the music you loved, thru the record labels. As such it was tolerated.
However, now the reproduction and distribution of digital content is virtually $0.00. It's also possible to market and promote in many new ways more cheaply with a wider reach.
When Lar starts complaining about people stealing Metallica's music he defined Metallica's relationship with its fans as economic. It's no surprise to me, that when a band as beloved by its fans as Metallica, perhaps unwittingly, defined the relationship as economic, that the fans react quickly and harshly.
Music fans share because they love music, it's natural to share and they view their relationship with music and artists as social, not economic.
It doesn't matter what law are enacted, what education is attempted, what pleading or bulling is tried. Music fans will never, ever accept a relationship with music and artists as economic, it just won't happen.
That doesn't mean music fans won't support their favorite bands financially. They will, as long as they are treated fairly and the nature of their connection with music is respected.
Music fans live in a world where it costs $1 for a low quality mp3 file or $13 for a $1 piece of plastic and the record industry insisting on an economic relationship between fans and artists. Society may be plunging but it isn't because of the music fans.
I [do] not run around chanting 'Death to the EFF' the way people here do to the RIAA. Because I'm an adult.
As you well know, the RIAA and the companies they represent are liars and cheaters, they ripoff artists and consumers any which way they can. It's hardly surprising that there are people chanting 'Death to the RIAA.'
And as an adult, would you say that your work largely exposes or facilitates these liars and cheaters?
Hmmm, maybe I haven't looked hard enough, but I can't seem to find any services selling the content I want in a lossless format for $0.25/song or $2.50/album.
What they call reasonable, I call theft
What they call the record industry, I call organized crime
If everyone had their way, musicians and all of their music would be free all of the time
There are plenty of people still willing to (over)pay for music.
Not all of the money goes to the right places
almost all the money goes to the wrong places. RIAA, Record labels and collection agencies don't give a shit about musicians. If they cared, they'd be more transparent. They are liars and cheats, why should anyone want to [w]ork *with* the system?
I don't defend illegal file sharing... but I also don't defend trying to sell over-priced product. If I have to choose between me stealing from the record companies or the record companies stealing from me... well, it's not a hard decision to make.
On the post: Oh No! Book Piracy Is Coming! Run And Hide!
Re:
On the post: Werewolf TV Show Blocked From DVD Release Due To Music Licensing
Re: The producers got what they paid for then... now want more.
People just want their culture, keeping it from them for such frivolous reasons is stupid.
But I guess it just goes to show how inept and incompetent entertainment lawyers are that deals can't be done to get these shows released in a timely manner in their original form.
On the post: Music Critic Explains Why The Music Industry Is Better Off Embracing Fans
Re: we've been hearing this for 20 years
Things don't happen over night. I think it's only a matter of time before we start seeing breakthrough artists. But it may be a few years before that happens.
Time will tell and maybe I will be proven wrong.
On the post: Questions Raised As To Why Connected Nation Selected In Florida Despite Costing More Than Double
Turns out in this case Mike didn't have to look to hard.
How hard will it be to find out if you are as corrupt as Bill Price?
On the post: Since When Is Sharing So Bad?
Really?
It's interesting that a few people here are focusing on the sharing between music fans. But, ignoring the idea of sharing between artist and fan.
The article makes the following comment (I think it's Mike, but everything is italics so it's unclear).
"There's plenty of work in behavioral economics that shows we classify transactions as either "social" or "economic". We apply different standards to each. The social realm is all about reciprocity and trust, while the economic realm is all about value and rules."
I think the key to understanding what's going on with file-sharing is understanding the above. Music fans are fans of music and the artists that create it. Music is culture, communication. It's a social interaction. Music fans don't view their relationship with artists as economic.
During the 20th century, there was only one way to own the music you loved, thru the record labels. As such it was tolerated.
However, now the reproduction and distribution of digital content is virtually $0.00. It's also possible to market and promote in many new ways more cheaply with a wider reach.
When Lar starts complaining about people stealing Metallica's music he defined Metallica's relationship with its fans as economic. It's no surprise to me, that when a band as beloved by its fans as Metallica, perhaps unwittingly, defined the relationship as economic, that the fans react quickly and harshly.
Music fans share because they love music, it's natural to share and they view their relationship with music and artists as social, not economic.
It doesn't matter what law are enacted, what education is attempted, what pleading or bulling is tried. Music fans will never, ever accept a relationship with music and artists as economic, it just won't happen.
That doesn't mean music fans won't support their favorite bands financially. They will, as long as they are treated fairly and the nature of their connection with music is respected.
Music fans live in a world where it costs $1 for a low quality mp3 file or $13 for a $1 piece of plastic and the record industry insisting on an economic relationship between fans and artists. Society may be plunging but it isn't because of the music fans.
On the post: Morrissey: Don't Buy My Music
Re:
On the post: Why Are RIAA Supporters So Scared Of What Actual Musicians Think?
you presume to speak on behalf of everyone not named Mike Masnick?
On the post: CwF + RtB = Techdirt
On the post: RIAA Wastes Little Time Trying To Extend Interpretation Of Usenet.com Victory
On the post: RIAA Wastes Little Time Trying To Extend Interpretation Of Usenet.com Victory
Hmmm, maybe I haven't looked hard enough, but I can't seem to find any services selling the content I want in a lossless format for $0.25/song or $2.50/album.
What they call reasonable, I call theft
What they call the record industry, I call organized crime
On the post: How ASCAP And BMI Are Harming Up-And-Coming Singers
There are plenty of people still willing to (over)pay for music.
Not all of the money goes to the right places
almost all the money goes to the wrong places. RIAA, Record labels and collection agencies don't give a shit about musicians. If they cared, they'd be more transparent. They are liars and cheats, why should anyone want to [w]ork *with* the system?
On the post: Digital Britain: Few Surprises As It Looks To Prop Up Content Industries
Next >>