Re: Mike wants out-of-control piracy, upset by contrary claims.
I'm not sure anyone here has ever argued that the RIAA is successful at anything. If so, they're wrong.
The only reason the RIAA is worth worrying about is due to the massive collateral damage their little hissy fits cause. I don't care about any of the music published on any of the labels they represent, nor any of the people involved with them. I do, however, worry about ever-increasing copyright terms, the Internet Archive being declared a "rogue site," and the spreading of propaganda.
But looking back at the golden years of the recording industry, their solution didn't scale either. Lost in this nostalgic view is the fact that the old method of "sign-with-label, make-record, sell-record" didn't scale either. For every artist that made it big with a major label, many, many more ended up hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt with no control over any of their recorded output. With royalties slowly being applied to their outstanding balances, these bands had to tour and sell merchandise to make money. Sound familiar?
This paragraph should be tattooed to the head of everyone with ASCAP, the RIAA, Digital Music News, and everyone else who laments the downfall of retail music. The market for copies may have effectively ended, but nothing has fundamentally changed.
I'm finding myself in agreement with this mentality lately. I was for scaling back copyright, but the more B.S. it leads to every day, the more I think the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater.
"Oh, you damn kids, with your World of Warfare, and your diddy-bopping music, and your roadsters with the rumble seats, and the YouTube, and the Google..."
The ruling was a default judgment, meaning that the guy being sued simply did not respond to being sued (a dumb move).
I disagree with this. Not responding and accepting the default judgement is generally cheaper than hiring an attorney and fighting, and it's less convenient for those filing against you than a settlement. They still have to go to court (assuming they don't drop it), and the victim isn't likely to get hit with a Jammie Thomas $2 million judgement.
Didn't you see the article on the spike of infringement of Fox shows due to delaying access an additional week?
So, AC, official statement time: In your opionion,
a) Are companies like FOX justified or not in delaying online programming?
b) Will it not necessarily lead to an increase in piracy, because not everyone is a freeloading freetard?
c) Does it create piracy spikes?
Three questions, I hope you can manage three straight answers without berating me or talking down. It's time to your cards on the table and choose a side.
On the post: RIAA Claims It Succeeded In Getting Piracy Under Control Years Ago
Re: Mike wants out-of-control piracy, upset by contrary claims.
The only reason the RIAA is worth worrying about is due to the massive collateral damage their little hissy fits cause. I don't care about any of the music published on any of the labels they represent, nor any of the people involved with them. I do, however, worry about ever-increasing copyright terms, the Internet Archive being declared a "rogue site," and the spreading of propaganda.
On the post: In A World Where Recorded Music 'No Longer Has Monetary Value,' The Artist Is King
Re: Re:
You're actually denying that over 90% of label musicians don't make money? In that case, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
On the post: In A World Where Recorded Music 'No Longer Has Monetary Value,' The Artist Is King
This paragraph should be tattooed to the head of everyone with ASCAP, the RIAA, Digital Music News, and everyone else who laments the downfall of retail music. The market for copies may have effectively ended, but nothing has fundamentally changed.
On the post: RIAA Really Planning To Join Righthaven Fight
Re:
On the post: Internal Fight Within The ABA Over Position On SOPA
Re: Just end it already
On the post: Copyright Industries Massive Success Shows That They're Dying And Need More Draconian Copyright Laws?
Re: Re: Re: Yet I can tell you right now that exactly zero percent of our revenue is due to copyright law.
No.
On the post: Copyright Industries Massive Success Shows That They're Dying And Need More Draconian Copyright Laws?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Oh my god, no. No, they aren't.
On the post: How Copyright Extension Is Harming Classical Music
Re: Re: Re: @ That Anonymous Coward:
Oh, the unfettered irony of a copywhiner posting that...
On the post: BMI Says Club Is Too Sexy For Standard Fees, Voids Check, Sues For Non-Payment
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Says who? As long as it has a beat that the girls can move to, nobody will give a damn whether the artist is "signed" or not.
On the post: Cocaine Ring Used Universal Music's Interscope Label To Ship Drugs & Cash
Re:
On the post: Insurers Suggest Podium & Stage Collapse Tragedies Are The Inevitable Result Of File Sharing?
Re:
Because the recording industry places near-as-dammit to 100% of the blame for falling CD sales on file-sharing.
On the post: Harlan Ellison Sues Again; Because No One Could Have Possibly Came Up With The Same SciFi Ideas As He Did
Re: Re: Ellison
On the post: Shouldn't Unilateral Retroactive Copyright Extension Mean Copyright Is Void?
Re:
I'm sure that was running through the recently severed head of at least one French nobleman right after it landed in the basket.
On the post: Article About 'The Menace Of The Software Pirates' From 1985
Re: Yet "DRM" enforcement is stronger than ever!
"Oh, you damn kids, with your World of Warfare, and your diddy-bopping music, and your roadsters with the rumble seats, and the YouTube, and the Google..."
On the post: MPAA: Bad At Math & Bad At Economics
Re:
And no, I don't "pirate" anything.
On the post: Former RIAA Lobbyist, Now Judge, Says Lowest Possible Statutory Damages For Single Case Of Infringement Is $3,430
I disagree with this. Not responding and accepting the default judgement is generally cheaper than hiring an attorney and fighting, and it's less convenient for those filing against you than a settlement. They still have to go to court (assuming they don't drop it), and the victim isn't likely to get hit with a Jammie Thomas $2 million judgement.
On the post: More Misplaced Hatred For The Used Games Market
Re:
On the post: Don Henley Hatred Of YouTube Clouding His Vision On PROTECT IP
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wow!
So, AC, official statement time: In your opionion,
a) Are companies like FOX justified or not in delaying online programming?
b) Will it not necessarily lead to an increase in piracy, because not everyone is a freeloading freetard?
c) Does it create piracy spikes?
Three questions, I hope you can manage three straight answers without berating me or talking down. It's time to your cards on the table and choose a side.
On the post: Don Henley Hatred Of YouTube Clouding His Vision On PROTECT IP
Re: some of the facts
On the post: Don Henley Hatred Of YouTube Clouding His Vision On PROTECT IP
Re: Re: Re: Wow!
Earn a break. Nobody's going to give you anything, you astroturfed freetard.
Next >>