It doesn't take long to look at Mr Albini's numbers and realize that he has his thumb on the scales, so to speak.
The big error: 250,000 records sold, but only $50,000 in tour revenue. That means $10,000 a week, and at 5 shows a week, that is $2000 per show. That would be about 100 tickets per show (at $20 each), which is just not very logical numbers for a band that pushes out 250,000 albums in the same time frame.
More importantly, he doesn't explain why you only tour 5 weeks instead of 10, 20, 30, or all year. If each band member made 4k in 5 weeks, they are on line to make 40 to 50k a year just playing music. Those aren't riches, but those are pretty decent numbers, considering they didn't have to put up the money up front to make this go.
He also doesn't point out that using the long tail theories, that album will continue to sell for years (and Nirvana has done. The next 250,000 copies will generate something like 300,000 net for the band. Oh wait, he doesn't want you to look at things realistically, just in a very narrow way.
Further, he also doesn't address the number of acts that the label puts up the money and they never sell worth shit. For every success, there are how many failures? Let's say it's 3 to 1. Guess what? The record labels only broke even by his numbers, because they made $719,000 against $250k up front this time, but the next 2 lose them the $250k, netting them nothing.
According to Mike, it is very easy to know what is legal. If stuff is in doubt, it probably isn't legal, and don't list it.
So you can list Linux distros, Nina Paley's movie, and Corey Smith's music. A pretty complete tracker, no?
Those who want to be legal and want to benefit from providing a legal service will find the ways to do it. Those who come up with excuses are just looking for ways to enjoy illegally obtained content and products.
Some might just have it in their head that the premiere is tonight at 8 o'clock or whenever and have made plans accordingly.
That is the point my friend. It doesn't matter when it is available "on demand" or "on torrent" in the future, there is only one time when it becomes real, the original, the premiere, and that is (insert date and time here). People will chat about it for a couple of days after, and then it is gone. Like a wave, it is over.
Yes, you can watch pictures of the wave and enjoy it in your own way, but it isn't the same as seeing it, chatting with your friends about it after (or even as it is playing, as some do online). It is a shared experience, one of the many things that makes our lives enjoyable, and something that is lost (still no pun intended) if there is no longer a time and place to enjoy that experience.
In many ways, it is the difference between seeing a new movie on debut night with some friends in a crowded theater, and watching it at home 12 months later by yourself. The experience is different, it certainly isn't shared.
You can torrent AI after the fact, but no matter what you do, it's after the fact. It's past it's due date already at that point, like buying stale bread. You can pirate the resulting video, but you can't pirate the live performance. It's the difference in theory between seeing a live concert and watching a concert video. Oh yeah, except that nobody is around the old water cooler next year chatting about last nights Idol show (it's already a year old).
How many people will watch the Super Bowl? How many will watch a torrent of it 6 months from now? It's stale bread.
Oh, as for your "million hits", you only have to go a few pages to find things that aren't torrents at all, just people trying to suck up Google traffic with keywords. In fact, by putting America Idol Torrent into the comments of this page, we have just moved it to 991,001 results, congrats!
So just because NBC Universal is too clueless to figure out how to take advantage of a great distribution and promotion mechanism, people who want to use those tools and want to embrace better forms of distribution and marketing shouldn't be able to?
This is another point of discussion, but it is where there is a disconnect between the story and your perceptions of reality.
With much of the content on the torrents being illegal (not just infringing, that is nice speak for "stolen" or used without permission), the problem isn't that some aren't using the service, but that people who don't own the rights to things are making the choices for the rights holders, which is just wrong.
People have to learn to respect others. If NBC doesn't want their stuff on a torrent, you shouldn't put it there. If Corey Smith wants his album distributed on P2P, enjoy it. That is the right holder's choice, not yours.
Nobody is telling anyone not to use a given protocol for distribution. What they are saying is that if the vast majority of the traffic and content is illegal, why should that be tolerated to allow a very small percentage of legal stuff to occur? Legal torrent holders would be wise to separate themselves from the pirate sites and the illegal torrent havens, and prove they are not illegal. If you hang around with thieves and hoodlums, don't be shocked if people mistake you for being a hoodlum.
Mike, why doesn't Floor64 man up and run a torrent tracker for only legal stuff? Why not be a leader rather than just a commentator? Now is your change to lead P2P to the promise land, away from the illegal stuff, and to justify it's existence. Come on, you can do it! :)
I read into it exactly the opposite. It shows what a piss poor job so much of the industry has done figuring out how to embrace the obvious demand that's out there
Every time I read something like this, all I can picture is a shop owner handing out a free t-shirt to every shop lifter and paying their taxi home, or a movie theater owner bringing free popcorn and drinks for the people who snuck in the back door.
There will always be a huge demand to get something for nothing. Giving away your something for nothing leaves you nothing. It's sort of simple.
Mike, how the heck can you think that an end user suddenly qualifies for 230 protection? An internet connection (private) is the end of the line. It's like a phone. If you allow anyone and everyone to make long distance calls on your phone, you are responsible. If you allow people to access the internet via your private (non-commercial) connection, you are responsible in the same manner.
Attempting to stretch 230 into this the reason why 230 will in the end fail, because people like you attempt to apply it where it doesn't apply at all.
Mike runs plenty of studies that show things positive to "FREE!" and file trading, and they are just as much not representative of the real world. You seem to miss that most torrent sites are full of pirated / illegal material, it's the nature of the game.
I just wish Mike would address that issue head on, rather than pandering to those people by not discussing the obvious legal implications.
For the fans outside of the US, it's their loss. They miss the shared experience, they miss the "water cooler" discussions the next day, etc. All of that is lost.
In the "on demand" universe, that connection is lost (no pun intended), which in many ways lowers the value of the entertainment to all. It's too bad that in the headlong rush of technology, we lose what often made things special to start with.
Everyone wonders why American Idol and such do so well... it's because you can't pirate a live performance, you can't P2P a shared experience. They are special because of it.
Which means that what was in the Guardian was potentially a sample of the book or something similar, with a limited use license. The photo was taken by David Levene, who appears to be a paper staff photographer, thus explains why the image is still there (they own the rights to it).
I would say the best answer to the question could be found by contact Ms Hibbert.
Proof only that the shared experience (of a nation of fans watching the same thing at the same time) is powerful.
I think the key quote in all of this is:
"Why spoil it now?" wrote one fan with the moniker MyWhiteNoise. "I'd rather watch it in hi-def and surround sound than ruin the surprise and watch some (low-quality) video."
I think the results might be different if the leaked video was a 1080p with high quality sound, rather than a low end version.
Jeff, read carefully. Consumers decide which business models are right and wrong by supporting the ones they like. If you like shiny plastic discs, you buy from shiny plastic disc companies. If you like digital files, you take your stuff from digital download sites. The public makes their choice by spending their money (or their valuable time) with those companies which offer their preferred business model.
Where I object is when the business models are selected not by actual user. That is why I said "and then supporting none of them"). Nothing like having someone tell you how to run your business, and then not buy your products anyway.
It is a situation that doesn't follow basic rules of commerce or economics.
A standard user, with a wifi set with WEP (default active from the cable or DSL company), with a standard anti-virus, firewall turned on, updated regularly has nothing more they need to know, unless they want to run specialized software.
The rest of your questions are things that end users don't generally need to know. WiFi routers/modem combinations (2wire is a commonly used company for this) are shipped to the user pre-secured already. The Wireless is secured with a significant security key, and the only way to access the modem otherwise is via hard wire. While the wireless key isn't impossible to hack, it's a pretty long key, and the time to test a key is long enough to make brute force hacking a pretty useless way to get in, and most of the tools to hack WEP require that there are active users on it (which there was not in this case). For example, the WEP key (default) on my 2wire is 26 characters. The total clicks required to turn off wireless is 3, and could easily be explained by technical support.
Any modem with wireless (especially if she isn't using it) can have the wireless turned off. The modem is likely from a company like 2wire or similar, and disabling the wireless is a single check box and the things turns off.
Also, the companies don't send these wireless units out without putting WEP or similar on them.
Again, if this happened once, it might be something. That it happened over and over again shows someone who wasn't taking care of the situation and wasn't asking for a resolution to an issue. I am sort of amazed that you think someone should not at all be responsible for anything, even as they watched it happen over and over again.
Does Quest have some responsibility? Yes. But the end user has at least part of the responsibility as well.
Oh yeah, I still dare you. You are a big talker, now show us how you do it.
Re: TAM the amazing TAMHOLE ...now with MORE HOLE!!
RD, you need to take your meds.
I never, ever, ever, ever, ever have said that copyright is the only answer, but legally it is the default answer. Default does not mean that you cannot make another choice. From Creative Commons, share alike, or copyleft, or any number of other options, the artist can choose to go that way.
However, in doing so, they are going against what is a default, and they should not be surprised (particularly in music) if there songs sometimes get roped together with copyright product, or are treated as such. At this point, CC music or other copyleft style things are rare as hell, and as a result, most of the players in the game don't have any real way to handle them. If the idea of CC music became more widespread (and common to popular music, not to acts nobody has heard of) I am sure that the systems in place might change.
Really, you need to start back on your meds, without them you are aggressive and forgetful.
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
Re: Heh.....
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
It doesn't take long to look at Mr Albini's numbers and realize that he has his thumb on the scales, so to speak.
The big error: 250,000 records sold, but only $50,000 in tour revenue. That means $10,000 a week, and at 5 shows a week, that is $2000 per show. That would be about 100 tickets per show (at $20 each), which is just not very logical numbers for a band that pushes out 250,000 albums in the same time frame.
More importantly, he doesn't explain why you only tour 5 weeks instead of 10, 20, 30, or all year. If each band member made 4k in 5 weeks, they are on line to make 40 to 50k a year just playing music. Those aren't riches, but those are pretty decent numbers, considering they didn't have to put up the money up front to make this go.
He also doesn't point out that using the long tail theories, that album will continue to sell for years (and Nirvana has done. The next 250,000 copies will generate something like 300,000 net for the band. Oh wait, he doesn't want you to look at things realistically, just in a very narrow way.
Further, he also doesn't address the number of acts that the label puts up the money and they never sell worth shit. For every success, there are how many failures? Let's say it's 3 to 1. Guess what? The record labels only broke even by his numbers, because they made $719,000 against $250k up front this time, but the next 2 lose them the $250k, netting them nothing.
Sorry to answer your questions directly.
On the post: Of Course Most Content Shared On BitTorrent Infringes; But That's Meaningless
Re: Re:
On the post: Of Course Most Content Shared On BitTorrent Infringes; But That's Meaningless
Re: Re:
So you can list Linux distros, Nina Paley's movie, and Corey Smith's music. A pretty complete tracker, no?
Those who want to be legal and want to benefit from providing a legal service will find the ways to do it. Those who come up with excuses are just looking for ways to enjoy illegally obtained content and products.
On the post: Of Course Most Content Shared On BitTorrent Infringes; But That's Meaningless
Re: Re:
I wish you would read comments a little more closely before jumping to conclusions.
On the post: Reporter, TV Execs (Maybe?) Confused Over Lost Fans Choosing Not To Watch Leaked Episode
Re:
That is the point my friend. It doesn't matter when it is available "on demand" or "on torrent" in the future, there is only one time when it becomes real, the original, the premiere, and that is (insert date and time here). People will chat about it for a couple of days after, and then it is gone. Like a wave, it is over.
Yes, you can watch pictures of the wave and enjoy it in your own way, but it isn't the same as seeing it, chatting with your friends about it after (or even as it is playing, as some do online). It is a shared experience, one of the many things that makes our lives enjoyable, and something that is lost (still no pun intended) if there is no longer a time and place to enjoy that experience.
In many ways, it is the difference between seeing a new movie on debut night with some friends in a crowded theater, and watching it at home 12 months later by yourself. The experience is different, it certainly isn't shared.
On the post: Reporter, TV Execs (Maybe?) Confused Over Lost Fans Choosing Not To Watch Leaked Episode
Re: Re: Re: Re:
How many people will watch the Super Bowl? How many will watch a torrent of it 6 months from now? It's stale bread.
Oh, as for your "million hits", you only have to go a few pages to find things that aren't torrents at all, just people trying to suck up Google traffic with keywords. In fact, by putting America Idol Torrent into the comments of this page, we have just moved it to 991,001 results, congrats!
Sorry Paul, but you are losing on this one.
On the post: Of Course Most Content Shared On BitTorrent Infringes; But That's Meaningless
This is another point of discussion, but it is where there is a disconnect between the story and your perceptions of reality.
With much of the content on the torrents being illegal (not just infringing, that is nice speak for "stolen" or used without permission), the problem isn't that some aren't using the service, but that people who don't own the rights to things are making the choices for the rights holders, which is just wrong.
People have to learn to respect others. If NBC doesn't want their stuff on a torrent, you shouldn't put it there. If Corey Smith wants his album distributed on P2P, enjoy it. That is the right holder's choice, not yours.
Nobody is telling anyone not to use a given protocol for distribution. What they are saying is that if the vast majority of the traffic and content is illegal, why should that be tolerated to allow a very small percentage of legal stuff to occur? Legal torrent holders would be wise to separate themselves from the pirate sites and the illegal torrent havens, and prove they are not illegal. If you hang around with thieves and hoodlums, don't be shocked if people mistake you for being a hoodlum.
Mike, why doesn't Floor64 man up and run a torrent tracker for only legal stuff? Why not be a leader rather than just a commentator? Now is your change to lead P2P to the promise land, away from the illegal stuff, and to justify it's existence. Come on, you can do it! :)
On the post: Of Course Most Content Shared On BitTorrent Infringes; But That's Meaningless
Every time I read something like this, all I can picture is a shop owner handing out a free t-shirt to every shop lifter and paying their taxi home, or a movie theater owner bringing free popcorn and drinks for the people who snuck in the back door.
There will always be a huge demand to get something for nothing. Giving away your something for nothing leaves you nothing. It's sort of simple.
On the post: News.com Prevents Falsely Accused Grandmother Of Getting Kicked Off The Internet By The MPAA
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Attempting to stretch 230 into this the reason why 230 will in the end fail, because people like you attempt to apply it where it doesn't apply at all.
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
Re: Re: Re: Journalist
I just wish Mike would address that issue head on, rather than pandering to those people by not discussing the obvious legal implications.
On the post: Reporter, TV Execs (Maybe?) Confused Over Lost Fans Choosing Not To Watch Leaked Episode
Re: Re:
In the "on demand" universe, that connection is lost (no pun intended), which in many ways lowers the value of the entertainment to all. It's too bad that in the headlong rush of technology, we lose what often made things special to start with.
Everyone wonders why American Idol and such do so well... it's because you can't pirate a live performance, you can't P2P a shared experience. They are special because of it.
On the post: Has The Recording Industry Reached The Bargaining Stage Of Grief?
Re: K-M model outdated
On the post: Bad Web Experience: This Article Removed Because Of Copyright?
I was not surprised to find:
http://www.cdwow.com/books/Katharine-Hibbert-Free/dp/pc/10768947
Which means that what was in the Guardian was potentially a sample of the book or something similar, with a limited use license. The photo was taken by David Levene, who appears to be a paper staff photographer, thus explains why the image is still there (they own the rights to it).
I would say the best answer to the question could be found by contact Ms Hibbert.
On the post: Reporter, TV Execs (Maybe?) Confused Over Lost Fans Choosing Not To Watch Leaked Episode
I think the key quote in all of this is:
"Why spoil it now?" wrote one fan with the moniker MyWhiteNoise. "I'd rather watch it in hi-def and surround sound than ruin the surprise and watch some (low-quality) video."
I think the results might be different if the leaked video was a 1080p with high quality sound, rather than a low end version.
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
Re: Re: Re: Journalist
Where I object is when the business models are selected not by actual user. That is why I said "and then supporting none of them"). Nothing like having someone tell you how to run your business, and then not buy your products anyway.
It is a situation that doesn't follow basic rules of commerce or economics.
On the post: News.com Prevents Falsely Accused Grandmother Of Getting Kicked Off The Internet By The MPAA
Re: Re:
"As an end user, you don't need to know".
A standard user, with a wifi set with WEP (default active from the cable or DSL company), with a standard anti-virus, firewall turned on, updated regularly has nothing more they need to know, unless they want to run specialized software.
The rest of your questions are things that end users don't generally need to know. WiFi routers/modem combinations (2wire is a commonly used company for this) are shipped to the user pre-secured already. The Wireless is secured with a significant security key, and the only way to access the modem otherwise is via hard wire. While the wireless key isn't impossible to hack, it's a pretty long key, and the time to test a key is long enough to make brute force hacking a pretty useless way to get in, and most of the tools to hack WEP require that there are active users on it (which there was not in this case). For example, the WEP key (default) on my 2wire is 26 characters. The total clicks required to turn off wireless is 3, and could easily be explained by technical support.
On the post: News.com Prevents Falsely Accused Grandmother Of Getting Kicked Off The Internet By The MPAA
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, the companies don't send these wireless units out without putting WEP or similar on them.
Again, if this happened once, it might be something. That it happened over and over again shows someone who wasn't taking care of the situation and wasn't asking for a resolution to an issue. I am sort of amazed that you think someone should not at all be responsible for anything, even as they watched it happen over and over again.
Does Quest have some responsibility? Yes. But the end user has at least part of the responsibility as well.
Oh yeah, I still dare you. You are a big talker, now show us how you do it.
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
Re: TAM the amazing TAMHOLE ...now with MORE HOLE!!
I never, ever, ever, ever, ever have said that copyright is the only answer, but legally it is the default answer. Default does not mean that you cannot make another choice. From Creative Commons, share alike, or copyleft, or any number of other options, the artist can choose to go that way.
However, in doing so, they are going against what is a default, and they should not be surprised (particularly in music) if there songs sometimes get roped together with copyright product, or are treated as such. At this point, CC music or other copyleft style things are rare as hell, and as a result, most of the players in the game don't have any real way to handle them. If the idea of CC music became more widespread (and common to popular music, not to acts nobody has heard of) I am sure that the systems in place might change.
Really, you need to start back on your meds, without them you are aggressive and forgetful.
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
Re: Re: Re: Journalist
You are an idiot troll, aren't you?
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
Re:
It's a history lesson, and just history repeating under a different name.
Next >>