I'm amazed that the dollars for pennies post took so long to appear. None of the ACs that use this phrase understand the concept of elasticity in economics.
My personal theory on this is that because of IP Law there isn't usually any need to learn about elasticity in the content industry. Having a monopoly gives a false sense of value.
The absolutely AMAZING thing is that even when the content industry sees the results of lowering price to increase profit, they still laugh and say its trading dollars for pennies.
I think we can safely say that a large portion of the "lost sales" in the content industry are due to poor pricing decisions.
Looked at the list and it doesn't appear as if that group can agree on much at all. IP lawyers and repressive regimes, niiiiice.
Yes there are a few names including IV and Disney that absolutely do not belong on the list. Actually anyone involved in IP law doesn't belong on any internet governance panel. The telcos should be there and the cable companies and probably Intel and HP or even Apple before Disney and IV.
Then again, maybe a lot more technology people should start writing IP law.
Regardless of our assessments of this case, it would appear this is one that the US Government absolutely has to win. Otherwise, what was the point? If the US Government doesn't win it's case then the whole site just goes right back up and the DOJ looks extremely bad. Not to mention the blowback, as there will be A LOT of people asking about due process. It's already frightening that there appears to be almost no due process when it comes to taking down websites, in fact, most of the website seizures have been predicated on the preservation of evidence.
They picked a very high profile target and with that many eyes on a case littered with dubious evidence and procedures, they kinda have to win it.
Since there are nowhere near enough terrorist plots to fuel ongoing legislation like the Patriot Act, the FBI has been tasked with filling in the gaps and proving the need for such laws.
Without all this terrorism, it would be extremely difficult for some of the wackadoodles in Congress to keep their jobs. If they couldn't decry "My opponent is weak on terrorism", they might actually have to have a political platform. Since it looks like TERRORISM is losing steam, I have to wonder how long before Protecting the Children rises to the top again.
It's just a dream, but maybe Congress might want to actually focus on problems it can solve.
I really wonder why courts (and regular people) have so much trouble understanding that just because communication is done online, it's still communication.
Add online or cyber to something or do something on a computer and suddenly it becomes incomprehensible "magic".
It took the great minds at Harvard to figure out what us "average" consumers figured out a long time ago.
Keep raising the legitimate price of content that is readily available for less or free illegally, and the consumer will simply stop buying and seek a legitimate alternative. Or worse, make a legitimate alternative.
It took the great minds at Harvard to figure out what us "average" consumers figured out a long time ago.
Keep raising the legitimate price of content that is readily available for less or free illegally, and the consumer will simply stop buying and seek a legitimate alternative. Or worse, make a legitimate alternative.
The opening troll on this post just made me laugh. Regardless of what people believe about piracy, Tor just took a step toward securing paying consumers and beating out its competitors.
From the Tor point of view, it's more like: Who cares about piracy as long as the paying customers are paying us.
If it's going to be a partisan fight, then the Dems should just call the bluff and vote against the bill. Leave it up to the GOP to prove any damage from cybercrime.
Since most of Congress can't seem to even find Google on the web, what's the chance they would even recognize a cybercrime if it happened.
btw is CISPA supposed to stop identity theft or phishing? WTF are they even considering cybercrime? How does a cybercrime make planes fall from the sky? Congress should really stop using Hollywood writers to write the laws.
I'm going to actually side with the RIAA on this one. I'm going to assume the casual relationship between infringement and lost sales has been proven now.
Ok RIAA, you have your proof. Please show me the increase in jobs now. The death of piracy was supposed to immediately impact the job sector positively. France should have experienced a spike in its economy.
I have to say that the final question and final answer in the debate were spot on.
Paraphasing:
Q. What if it wasn't music? What if the piracy problem were encountered in food production and farmers were losing money?
A. You mean if I could copy a carrot infinitely and feed the world? Yeah, that's a great idea!
Alexis just illustrated that if you have an infinite supply of anything, then yes it's going to be difficult to make money on it, but not impossible, even though it may be questionable morally. When I was a kid, tap water was free, now it's about $1 per bottle. Maybe the music industry could learn from the water industry how to deal with free.
Ok I had to stop listening to the vid and comment.
"...for many many years AFTER they stopped recording, they made a decent living $150,000 -$200,000 a year."
Apparently that came to an end and Mr. Taplin feels that it's wrong and it's sad that the band members are broke.
I can't figure out why this is wrong or why it's sad that the band members are broke. If you make low 6 figure income for many many years and you don't manage it, then why is that sad for the rest of us. If you stopped working and received 6 figure income for many many years for work you did in the past, shouldn't you just be happy for what you had?
I guess I can try to suffer through the rest of Taplin's bullshit now.
This all gets so complex. For digital goods, I have to assume that the right of first sale does not apply to the digital world and that makes perfect sense, otherwise someone could simply buy a digital copy and then distribute it to the world legally. That just means that not for resale should be clearly marked for the consumer to see.
And this is where it gets complex. The ability to share a physical item is limited, but with a digital version, the desire to share is enhanced. If your friend wants to borrow a book and you say yes, then you no longer have that book until (if) it's returned to you. If a friend wants to borrow your ebook (pdf), not only is there no fear of loss, but there is the desire to share with more friends (assuming you like the book) because it's convenient. Why shouldn't we the consumers use the technology that we paid for to do what it allows us to do? (at this point I ask the trolls not to start whining and saying we can use a telephone to make bomb threats, is that ok too... oops the NSA picked that up... its just a post on a blog guys)
We as consumers can see where this is a problem for those who sell content for a living, but that really isn't our problem. It never has been. We copied CDs and cassettes before mp3s and TV shows and movies on VHS, but they were just distributed slower.
Personally I'm tired of the economic insults that the content industry hurls at us repeatedly about their "value" to the economy. The content industry is where disposable income is spent. There is no harm to the economy if the content industry fails completely. All of that money will just be spent on something else. All those lost jobs will just reappear wherever all of that disposable income flows. Why can't the content industry just be good lil capitalists and deal with it. Adapt already.
Aren't the Olympics being broadcast on TV? What's the issue with people taking pics and uploading them? Is that ban just during the events or forever?
I guess these questions are irrelevant since people will go to the games and they will take pics and vids and they will share them. That's what people do.
Fuck the IOC, either allow people to share their experiences or I suggest that free nations should start banning the Olympics.
On the post: Paulo Coehlo Convinces His Publisher To Offer (Almost) All Of His Ebooks For $0.99
Re:
My personal theory on this is that because of IP Law there isn't usually any need to learn about elasticity in the content industry. Having a monopoly gives a false sense of value.
The absolutely AMAZING thing is that even when the content industry sees the results of lowering price to increase profit, they still laugh and say its trading dollars for pennies.
I think we can safely say that a large portion of the "lost sales" in the content industry are due to poor pricing decisions.
On the post: Do We Really Want Intellectual Ventures And Disney 'Governing' The Internet?
Clusterfuck
Yes there are a few names including IV and Disney that absolutely do not belong on the list. Actually anyone involved in IP law doesn't belong on any internet governance panel. The telcos should be there and the cable companies and probably Intel and HP or even Apple before Disney and IV.
Then again, maybe a lot more technology people should start writing IP law.
On the post: Asking Fans For Support Isn't Begging, It's Solidifying Our Relationship
Re: Re: You Will Be Fine
All I can say to that is, don't be so anonymous AC. Tell us who you are so we can happily avoid paying you or listening to your music.
On the post: Law Professor: Megaupload Prosecution A 'Depressing Display Of Abuse Of Government Authority'
they kinda have to win
They picked a very high profile target and with that many eyes on a case littered with dubious evidence and procedures, they kinda have to win it.
On the post: NYTimes Realizes That The FBI Keeps Celebrating Breaking Up Its Own Terrorist Plots
Politics as usual
Without all this terrorism, it would be extremely difficult for some of the wackadoodles in Congress to keep their jobs. If they couldn't decry "My opponent is weak on terrorism", they might actually have to have a political platform. Since it looks like TERRORISM is losing steam, I have to wonder how long before Protecting the Children rises to the top again.
It's just a dream, but maybe Congress might want to actually focus on problems it can solve.
On the post: Are Facebook 'Likes' Protected By The First Amendment?
just DUH
Add online or cyber to something or do something on a computer and suddenly it becomes incomprehensible "magic".
On the post: Even Harvard Can't Afford Subscriptions To Academic Journals; Pushes For Open Access
wow
Keep raising the legitimate price of content that is readily available for less or free illegally, and the consumer will simply stop buying and seek a legitimate alternative. Or worse, make a legitimate alternative.
On the post: Even Harvard Can't Afford Subscriptions To Academic Journals; Pushes For Open Access
wow
Keep raising the legitimate price of content that is readily available for less or free illegally, and the consumer will simply stop buying and seek a legitimate alternative. Or worse, make a legitimate alternative.
On the post: Tor Listens To Authors And Readers And Ditches DRM
lol
From the Tor point of view, it's more like: Who cares about piracy as long as the paying customers are paying us.
On the post: Pointless Journalist Fight: Who Gets Credit For Tweeting A Story First?
Re:
So actually its MINE.
On the post: Stupid Politics As Usual To Drive The CISPA Narrative
Call the bluff
Since most of Congress can't seem to even find Google on the web, what's the chance they would even recognize a cybercrime if it happened.
btw is CISPA supposed to stop identity theft or phishing? WTF are they even considering cybercrime? How does a cybercrime make planes fall from the sky? Congress should really stop using Hollywood writers to write the laws.
On the post: Breivik, The Press And The Ongoing Myth Of The 'Violent Gamer'
journalism? really?
Headline:
Mass murderer sustains himself on diet of McDonald's! New study links fast food to terrorism.
On the post: RIAA Keeps Trying To Spin Hadopi's Clear Failure Into A Success Story
Im missing something
Ok RIAA, you have your proof. Please show me the increase in jobs now. The death of piracy was supposed to immediately impact the job sector positively. France should have experienced a spike in its economy.
On the post: The Latest In Hollywood Mathematics: A 46.3% Employment Increase Equals 'Countless Jobs Lost'
Re: Hollywood math
Ok even though that was pretty amusing, the reality is even funnier.
Return of the Jedi Gross Revenue: $572 million and rising
Return of the Jedi Net Profit: $0
On the post: The Band's Ex-Manager Accuses Reddit Of Profiting From Piracy In Debate With Co-Founder
Well ended
Paraphasing:
Q. What if it wasn't music? What if the piracy problem were encountered in food production and farmers were losing money?
A. You mean if I could copy a carrot infinitely and feed the world? Yeah, that's a great idea!
Alexis just illustrated that if you have an infinite supply of anything, then yes it's going to be difficult to make money on it, but not impossible, even though it may be questionable morally. When I was a kid, tap water was free, now it's about $1 per bottle. Maybe the music industry could learn from the water industry how to deal with free.
On the post: The Band's Ex-Manager Accuses Reddit Of Profiting From Piracy In Debate With Co-Founder
1:51
"...for many many years AFTER they stopped recording, they made a decent living $150,000 -$200,000 a year."
Apparently that came to an end and Mr. Taplin feels that it's wrong and it's sad that the band members are broke.
I can't figure out why this is wrong or why it's sad that the band members are broke. If you make low 6 figure income for many many years and you don't manage it, then why is that sad for the rest of us. If you stopped working and received 6 figure income for many many years for work you did in the past, shouldn't you just be happy for what you had?
I guess I can try to suffer through the rest of Taplin's bullshit now.
On the post: Is Selling Your Ultraviolet Code Copyright Infringement?
Same ol' rant
And this is where it gets complex. The ability to share a physical item is limited, but with a digital version, the desire to share is enhanced. If your friend wants to borrow a book and you say yes, then you no longer have that book until (if) it's returned to you. If a friend wants to borrow your ebook (pdf), not only is there no fear of loss, but there is the desire to share with more friends (assuming you like the book) because it's convenient. Why shouldn't we the consumers use the technology that we paid for to do what it allows us to do? (at this point I ask the trolls not to start whining and saying we can use a telephone to make bomb threats, is that ok too... oops the NSA picked that up... its just a post on a blog guys)
We as consumers can see where this is a problem for those who sell content for a living, but that really isn't our problem. It never has been. We copied CDs and cassettes before mp3s and TV shows and movies on VHS, but they were just distributed slower.
Personally I'm tired of the economic insults that the content industry hurls at us repeatedly about their "value" to the economy. The content industry is where disposable income is spent. There is no harm to the economy if the content industry fails completely. All of that money will just be spent on something else. All those lost jobs will just reappear wherever all of that disposable income flows. Why can't the content industry just be good lil capitalists and deal with it. Adapt already.
On the post: Mobile Phones Might Not Interfere With Planes, But They Sure Can Interfere With Pilots
I dare ya
On the post: London 2012 Olympics Win Gold Medal For Cluelessness By Banning Video And Photo Uploads To Social Media During Games
Just had to say it again
On the post: London 2012 Olympics Win Gold Medal For Cluelessness By Banning Video And Photo Uploads To Social Media During Games
WTF?????
I guess these questions are irrelevant since people will go to the games and they will take pics and vids and they will share them. That's what people do.
Fuck the IOC, either allow people to share their experiences or I suggest that free nations should start banning the Olympics.
Next >>