Damn... Should have said "try to force more money from their customers"...
Still, they've been losing money for quite some time but that isn't stopping them from their monopolistic practices. As well as it won't. They're subsidizedby the taxpayer to create games, they use the money for the ESRB, and even if they go bankrupt, the rules will favor the CEO and shareholders over the programmers and people that create the games.
The point here is that they're insulated from criticism and it's going to take a long time for them to actually think about their customers over their shareholders.
" Nobody was 'forced' to pay any money. Just people willing to part with their hard earned cash knowing there were DRM requirements, albeit even worse than anticipated"
I never said anyone was forced to pay money, just that the underlying issues are with their ignorance of what their customers want. Just think able how large their marketing department is compared to their game making department and you can realize that they can sell the idea of a game better than they can make one that rises to the level of customer anticipation on day one.
What EA has done is listen to the concerns of shareholders over people which is a very short term thinking plan. No matter how you slice it, this is going to create blowback that EA might not be ready for. I recall that they lost millions from their decisions for microtransactions in every game, loss of sales for Origin and other loss leaders that are crippling its ability to function.
I just think that if EA actually listened to their fans instead of boogeymen, it may work out better for them in the future.
That's the point. First, they control the market with copyright, then they work with DRM to monopolize profit. Both practices are anti-competitive by reducing competition for their version of city games. It's just that the DRM hadthe added bonus of angering fans of EA who happen to be legitimate customers.
Mike, the issue here isn't the DRM. That's a result of an obvious monopoly on this game.
What we have here is EA using their position to monopolize content and force more money out of their customers.
Just think about this:
" This all adds up to another spectacular DRM failure. When discussing piracy, game companies like to point out that a majority of their sales occur shortly after release, making these first few weeks critical to the success of the title. This critical sales period is used to justify DRM measures because, while every piece of software will eventually be cracked, anything that delays this inevitability results in a few more sales."
Now think about EA and how they've done everything to full their bottom line:
Starting a competitor to Steam and leaving the Stream customers in the wing.
Hated DRM that angered people in Spore, then bringing it back in this game.
There is more to it, but if EA coulee listen to its customers instead of listening to its shareholders, it might have seen this coming. But how it's organized its business insulates them from actual criticism that would have helped them avoid this costly experiment.
Because I honestly can't call this a "mistake". It's nothing more than a money grab from a company willing to screw over its customers and put profits over people. I doubt this will end in anything other than heartache.
The commerce clause gave them the power to regulate interstate commerce.
Yes, the Feds, as elected by the people, could regulate banks and businesses. That was their entire mission: ensure that democracy prospered and that people weren't hurt by greed from the rich, which was the effect of the charters.
It never occurred to the Founders that bribery and party politics would destroy our nation because they had known the rules that corporations lived by.
No, corporations were required to have charters that could be pulled at any time. That's what Andrew Jackson did with the Second Bank and it wasn't able to recover.
There are two things that could be the equivalent of a corporate death penalty were it not for our bribery laws that we call "corporate speech"
1) Charters that make a corporation invalid in a state.
2) Sherman anti-trust act which busts corporations that are illegal cartels or trusts that infringe on the rights of people.
It wouldn't be that hard in breaking up the big banks, big monopolies in publishing and other companies that were big and unwieldy.
In 1776, 1/3 of the nation decided to take on the largest army in the world at that time: The British army. They had one idea in mind, to eradicate the business that was hurting their nation at the time which was the East India Company.
Because of their monopolies on foreign goods, they urged the British to increase taxes on their colony. On top of this, they subsidized tea for the EIB. This lead to arguments against taxation without representation. But another effect had gone largely ignored...
It created our constitution that never spoke of corporations. Yet, now we have a Constitution that was supposed to have corporations regulated by state and federal governments which have now become too powerful and too greedy to be controlled.
This is a scary new turn in how we've lost democracy in the name of plutocracy...
It's just amazing that police spend so much time collecting a paycheck and harassing individuals instead of moving on and actually being smart for a change.
If it were merely the movie studios, I wouldn't be so quick to judge. The problem is it's the publishers in every gorramn industry .
People talk all day about artists and how they need to be paid but think for three seconds about every time those artists and creators demand payment.
Judges seem to ignore them for industry interests, creating the mercantilists that Adam Smith argues against.
Yet, what's amazing here is how these people accumulate wealth by destroying public utilities and all competition similar to RCA during the 1930s. The public is worse off when there are monopolists making obscene profits while the industry is worse off by being unable to advance and disrupt as needed to make the public better able to utilize technology.
It's sad, but there seriously needs to be better ways to create than Hollywood Accounting and using major movie studios as bankers. I'm glad for Kickstarter, but it's time to recognize that every time we hear a plea for the artists, we need to watch who is trying to take money out of our wallets.
Prior to launching his own law firm, Mr. Volkov was a a partner at LeClairRyan (2012-2013); Mayer Brown (2010-2012), Dickinson Wright (2008-2010); Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice (2008); Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, House Judiciary Committee (2005-2008); and Counsel, Senate Judiciary Committee (2003-2005); Assistant US Attorney, United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia (1989-2005); and a Trial Attorney, Antitrust Division, United States Department of Justice (1985-1989).
I can't even call that a newspaper. Journalism is about speaking truth to power and answering tough questions. This "editor" is about being a stenographer. When the going got tough, his courage got going.
His favorite color turned from green to yellow.
He sleeps with a night light while tucked in the fetal position.
His biggest regret in life is that he didn't get the job he wanted in being the secretary for a rich CEO.
I can't come up with enough bad things to say about a coward that decides that he'd rather get stepped on instead of standing up to bullies.
The fact that you persistently blame the victim of systematic abuse is stunning...
He brought on the potential for 35-50 years of imprisonment for supposed criminal activity for doing nothing but downloading journals.
Let's make this clear here...
The DoJ could have looked into actual money laundering from the big banks. They could have looked into fraud. There was even possible hacking from China. Yet, they decided that it was easier to go after someone for making a political statement about how open access to knowledge and research shouldbe .
They ignored any sense of proportion because to them, they get to play judge, jury, and executioner through the very corrupt concept of plea bargaining. They played around with the idea of making him a felon, where his life was essentially ruined. After an expensive trial, he could be found innocent but destitute. If he was found guilty, then there is a very real chance that he could still get seven years for doing something that comes naturally on a computer.l
You're unbelievable. Out of all that, you can't admit that the federal sentencingguidelines are vague because then you would have to admit that the 4000+ statutes can be used in ways unintended by Congress to punish the public far more than it punishes those who bought the government in the first place.
Hmmm... Overcharging him for civil disobedience to force him to comply with a law even though no one was harmed, no data was taken (since he gave it back), and the "victim" didn't want to press charges.
I love how you shoot the forest for the trees. Particularly the point where no one thinks he sought to profit from putting academic journals into the public domain to be discussed and help others attain knowledge except for the DOJ and other people in positions of power.
What I find the most amazing able this admission is how much this applies to any journalist our any that speaks out against corrupt institutions.
Recently, the DOJ decided that going against the HBC couldn't happen because thru were too big to fail. Huge charges against Blackwater were dropped down to misdemeanors.
Yet there is a grand jury out on Julian Assange for exposing government secrets and Aaron was facing 50 years.
So if you speak out against the status quo, if you decide that our government is corrupt, if you think about exposing how much of a lie our government had become, then prepare to face huge charges.
Amazing... So much time wasted in covering up crimes, that I fail to see how our government isn't a criminal cartel which needs more public input instead of private interests.
And I'm backed by the Founding Fathers steering that they never gave the SC that power by what is written in Federalist Paper 78. Nor will you find that power in the Constitution.
Not sure if just taking a class helps explain the problem though... Given how the system had been set up with the idea being we have nine wise elders just seems far too undemocratic and far too close to a faith-based belief that these none can do no wrong.
On the post: Launch Day Punishment: SimCity's Online-Only DRM Locking Purchasers Out Of Servers, Purchases
Re: Re: Re: Re: The bottom line
Still, they've been losing money for quite some time but that isn't stopping them from their monopolistic practices. As well as it won't. They're subsidizedby the taxpayer to create games, they use the money for the ESRB, and even if they go bankrupt, the rules will favor the CEO and shareholders over the programmers and people that create the games.
The point here is that they're insulated from criticism and it's going to take a long time for them to actually think about their customers over their shareholders.
On the post: Launch Day Punishment: SimCity's Online-Only DRM Locking Purchasers Out Of Servers, Purchases
Re: Re: The bottom line
I never said anyone was forced to pay money, just that the underlying issues are with their ignorance of what their customers want. Just think able how large their marketing department is compared to their game making department and you can realize that they can sell the idea of a game better than they can make one that rises to the level of customer anticipation on day one.
What EA has done is listen to the concerns of shareholders over people which is a very short term thinking plan. No matter how you slice it, this is going to create blowback that EA might not be ready for. I recall that they lost millions from their decisions for microtransactions in every game, loss of sales for Origin and other loss leaders that are crippling its ability to function.
I just think that if EA actually listened to their fans instead of boogeymen, it may work out better for them in the future.
On the post: Launch Day Punishment: SimCity's Online-Only DRM Locking Purchasers Out Of Servers, Purchases
Re: Re: The bottom line
On the post: Launch Day Punishment: SimCity's Online-Only DRM Locking Purchasers Out Of Servers, Purchases
The bottom line
What we have here is EA using their position to monopolize content and force more money out of their customers.
Just think about this:
" This all adds up to another spectacular DRM failure. When discussing piracy, game companies like to point out that a majority of their sales occur shortly after release, making these first few weeks critical to the success of the title. This critical sales period is used to justify DRM measures because, while every piece of software will eventually be cracked, anything that delays this inevitability results in a few more sales."
Now think about EA and how they've done everything to full their bottom line:
Starting a competitor to Steam and leaving the Stream customers in the wing.
Hated DRM that angered people in Spore, then bringing it back in this game.
There is more to it, but if EA coulee listen to its customers instead of listening to its shareholders, it might have seen this coming. But how it's organized its business insulates them from actual criticism that would have helped them avoid this costly experiment.
Because I honestly can't call this a "mistake". It's nothing more than a money grab from a company willing to screw over its customers and put profits over people. I doubt this will end in anything other than heartache.
On the post: So Much For Protecting US Interests - Most Big 'IP Intensive' Firms Are Foreign-Owned
Re: Re: Re: Re: First Revolution to the second...
Yes, the Feds, as elected by the people, could regulate banks and businesses. That was their entire mission: ensure that democracy prospered and that people weren't hurt by greed from the rich, which was the effect of the charters.
It never occurred to the Founders that bribery and party politics would destroy our nation because they had known the rules that corporations lived by.
On the post: Despite Threat Of $50,000 Fine, Montreal Designer Plans To Release More 'Real World' Counter-Strike Maps
On the post: So Much For Protecting US Interests - Most Big 'IP Intensive' Firms Are Foreign-Owned
Re: Re: First Revolution to the second...
There are two things that could be the equivalent of a corporate death penalty were it not for our bribery laws that we call "corporate speech"
1) Charters that make a corporation invalid in a state.
2) Sherman anti-trust act which busts corporations that are illegal cartels or trusts that infringe on the rights of people.
It wouldn't be that hard in breaking up the big banks, big monopolies in publishing and other companies that were big and unwieldy.
On the post: So Much For Protecting US Interests - Most Big 'IP Intensive' Firms Are Foreign-Owned
First Revolution to the second...
Because of their monopolies on foreign goods, they urged the British to increase taxes on their colony. On top of this, they subsidized tea for the EIB. This lead to arguments against taxation without representation. But another effect had gone largely ignored...
It created our constitution that never spoke of corporations. Yet, now we have a Constitution that was supposed to have corporations regulated by state and federal governments which have now become too powerful and too greedy to be controlled.
This is a scary new turn in how we've lost democracy in the name of plutocracy...
On the post: Misheard Will Smith Lyrics Results In Arrest Of Student And District-Wide Lockdown
Police need discipline
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re:
People talk all day about artists and how they need to be paid but think for three seconds about every time those artists and creators demand payment.
Judges seem to ignore them for industry interests, creating the mercantilists that Adam Smith argues against.
Yet, what's amazing here is how these people accumulate wealth by destroying public utilities and all competition similar to RCA during the 1930s. The public is worse off when there are monopolists making obscene profits while the industry is worse off by being unable to advance and disrupt as needed to make the public better able to utilize technology.
It's sad, but there seriously needs to be better ways to create than Hollywood Accounting and using major movie studios as bankers. I'm glad for Kickstarter, but it's time to recognize that every time we hear a plea for the artists, we need to watch who is trying to take money out of our wallets.
On the post: North Carolina Newspaper With No Backbone Apologizes For Its Request For Public Records
Re: Re: Re: What a pussy...
Does and does not want guns in society...
On the post: North Carolina Newspaper With No Backbone Apologizes For Its Request For Public Records
Re: Re: What a pussy...
Here, having gun data gives an assessment of who doors and shows not wasn't guns in society.
The problem with the paper is that he bowed away from a tough assignment and turned into a Lilly livered coward at the first few signs of danger.
This isn't journalism if you don't have the cottage to pursue the tough questions and speak truth to power.
It's merely stenography.
On the post: The Worst Article You Might Ever Read About 'Cybersecurity'
Re: Can't help but wonder
Prior to launching his own law firm, Mr. Volkov was a a partner at LeClairRyan (2012-2013); Mayer Brown (2010-2012), Dickinson Wright (2008-2010); Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice (2008); Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, House Judiciary Committee (2005-2008); and Counsel, Senate Judiciary Committee (2003-2005); Assistant US Attorney, United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia (1989-2005); and a Trial Attorney, Antitrust Division, United States Department of Justice (1985-1989).
So rooting for more power is right up his alley.
On the post: North Carolina Newspaper With No Backbone Apologizes For Its Request For Public Records
What a pussy...
His favorite color turned from green to yellow.
He sleeps with a night light while tucked in the fetal position.
His biggest regret in life is that he didn't get the job he wanted in being the secretary for a rich CEO.
I can't come up with enough bad things to say about a coward that decides that he'd rather get stepped on instead of standing up to bullies.
On the post: Cablevision Files Antitrust Suit Against Viacom For Forced Bundling Of Crappy TV Channels
Elephant in the room
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Just wow...
He brought on the potential for 35-50 years of imprisonment for supposed criminal activity for doing nothing but downloading journals.
Let's make this clear here...
The DoJ could have looked into actual money laundering from the big banks. They could have looked into fraud. There was even possible hacking from China. Yet, they decided that it was easier to go after someone for making a political statement about how open access to knowledge and research shouldbe .
They ignored any sense of proportion because to them, they get to play judge, jury, and executioner through the very corrupt concept of plea bargaining. They played around with the idea of making him a felon, where his life was essentially ruined. After an expensive trial, he could be found innocent but destitute. If he was found guilty, then there is a very real chance that he could still get seven years for doing something that comes naturally on a computer.l
You're unbelievable. Out of all that, you can't admit that the federal sentencingguidelines are vague because then you would have to admit that the 4000+ statutes can be used in ways unintended by Congress to punish the public far more than it punishes those who bought the government in the first place.
What a despicable moral standpoint...
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Re: Re: Just wow...
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Re: Re: Just wow...
I love how you shoot the forest for the trees. Particularly the point where no one thinks he sought to profit from putting academic journals into the public domain to be discussed and help others attain knowledge except for the DOJ and other people in positions of power.
On the post: DOJ Admits It Had To Put Aaron Swartz In Jail To Save Face Over The Arrest
Just wow...
Recently, the DOJ decided that going against the HBC couldn't happen because thru were too big to fail. Huge charges against Blackwater were dropped down to misdemeanors.
Yet there is a grand jury out on Julian Assange for exposing government secrets and Aaron was facing 50 years.
So if you speak out against the status quo, if you decide that our government is corrupt, if you think about exposing how much of a lie our government had become, then prepare to face huge charges.
Amazing... So much time wasted in covering up crimes, that I fail to see how our government isn't a criminal cartel which needs more public input instead of private interests.
On the post: To Argue That 'Copyright And The First Amendment Coexisted For 200 Years' Is To Ignore Reality
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh man...
Not sure if just taking a class helps explain the problem though... Given how the system had been set up with the idea being we have nine wise elders just seems far too undemocratic and far too close to a faith-based belief that these none can do no wrong.
Next >>