Translation - you are a waste of time. "Makes me want to go find a pirated version" does not translate as you said, clearly I've ALREADY PAID, but I want a copy that isn't laden with bullshit. And I DON'T pirate, I simply fast forward for 3 minutes (until they block that too).
So sorry, you fail yet again. And you're just so intelligent too, simply amazing.
Some creators bust their ass, many do NOT!
Fruits of their labour forever? Yeah I don't think so and neither does the general public. Want to get paid? Work, and keep working, not once and think you deserve a free ride for the rest of your life.
Want funds for your kids? Work and save, like everyone else.
"This stuff isn't hard" but apparently it is for you to grasp.
And finally you can't understand anything, it reads just fine, but clearly you're incompetent so let me translate:
"However, I believe in being humble and busting your ass is the only way to be worth something." - pretty much self explanatory, no confusion or uncertain direction. 1) Be humble and 2) Bust your ass at all you do!
" Busting your ass though, alone, does not mean you deserve to be paid." - again very self explanatory. 1) You don't deserve to be paid simply because you worked hard. Which means I work hard at what is relevant and needed, that's called working smart. Working hard at something no one wants or can use is stupid.
"No one owes you a living, you have to earn it! I do, thank you very much." -- Again, reiterates the points above.
Is that clear? If not, I don't care, anyone who isn't being disingenuous clearly gets it.
Um no actually. I get paid for what I do and I bust my ass for it too! I am highly valued where I work, so I am told.
However, I believe in being humble and busting your ass is the only way to be worth something. Busting your ass though, alone, does not mean you deserve to be paid.
No one owes you a living, you have to earn it! I do, thank you very much.
I pay people for their creative output if I like it, I don't download or listen to it or watch it if I don't like it. I don't like paying for DVD's that are full of 20 minutes of unskippable ads and piracy lectures. That makes me want to go find the pirated version, which contains the "content" I want, not the horseshit ads and lectures about piracy. Especially when they are bullshit to begin with.
So you're wrong on every front. But thanks for coming out.
I think you misunderstood, he was asking for effective means of enforcement. HADOPI shows how ineffective that was, where as Spotify shows an effective means of curbing filesharing.
That applies to the RIAA and your belief system as well!
Too many factors came in to play, from suddenly no one needed to spend $18 on a whole "album" when they only wanted 2 songs ($2 revenue - that's $16 "lost" revenue do to industry crap - not every album is crap, but a statistically significant, very large, amount is!), to video games, to home theatre, to streaming (legal and otherwise), to every stupid band from the 80's who hasn't released anything since then going on tour to generate income while dropping the revenue new artists would have if they could tour --- there's only so much $$ people have regardless of what the RIAA thinks, to economic downturns, to exposure and competition from indie artists (not just those on indie labels, many of which are owned by RIAA labels) and true indie artists who self publish, to Spotify, etc..
Too many factors but rather than say "well it's a combination of things, part of which is our own fault for not listening to Todd Rundgren, let alone Silicon Valley upstarts we sued or muscled out of business - RICO?" they say "Blame Piracy!"
That's you! That's your same crap. Don't acknowledge the other factors, piracy is an easy sell to ignorant people (artists who don't take the time to read everything they can - positive and negative, label execs who listen to lawyers who need the execs to pay them salaries so they distort facts and manipulate data, and politicians who if not bought by campaign contributions are muscled through connections or offered jobs if they "play along").
Do a bloody search. There are articles on this site (and elsewhere) that give examples. Since you're obviously too lazy to do any research we can conclude you're angry and require enforcement of copyrights because you're too lazy to work and earn money. You don't just create anymore and expect to get paid. Times have changed, adapt or go get a job where people tell you what to do (and soon be replaced by a robot).
Stop expecting people to spoon-feed you. Do a little research instead of sitting there like a baby expected to be waited on hand-and-foot.
For example, when they sued Napster and threatened to shut it down, people jumped on pirating like mad. Then more sites showed up. The more they took down, the more showed up.
How about the raw data around The Pirate Bay trial, remember when they were on trial and the file sharing numbers skyrocketed? How about announcements of suing people, yeah, same result - skyrocketed.
So yes, being a douche and trying to beat people into submission has INCREASED piracy - part of that was the awareness of free stuff as a result of all the media coverage. Part of that due to anger from those who used to purchase.
Technology is not driving the proliferation of piracy, draconian enforcement has a greater impact on that.
Technology has enabled anyone to write, record and release, self publishing means no more gatekeepers! That's what technology has brought you!
you're starting from the wrong premise: that we do not need "enforcement."
This, in a nutshell, demonstrates why you're fringe, and ultimately doomed to fail.
You will likely rant every day for the rest of your life against piracy, and it is going to accomplish absolutely nothing. Piracy is not going to ever go away. Ever. And your life will ultimately be viewed as one ginormous waste of time that was spent attempting to harm the few rights artists and creators possess and the public.
It might be understandable for a person to suggest law enforcement does work if that person was ignorant of society and history, but when someone has a degree from a reputable university like yourself, it's just intellectually dishonest. Law enforcement is designed to be a deterrent to lawbreaking, and it works often enough that society has decided laws are good to have. That fact isn't even open to discussion. And when society determines the laws are useless and no longer relevant, the laws must be changed (eg: prohibition).
Law enforcement does get in the way of, say, the next Spotify. I think you just threw in a second point so you wouldn't have 'enforcement does work' hanging out by itself, looking ludicrous.
Enforcement has made pirating a more popular than ever. Perhaps not the hard-core sociopaths that derail this blog, but for many, it most certainly has. For a great many people, it has become less of a PITA to pay than pirate though it still has a long way to go , and enforcement has not played a huge role in that. And you know it.
You'll probably counter with, "i've been saying we've made it easier all along", to which I say: that new reality is here, and yet you're still bitching about copyright and enforcement. Your true motives are clearly not that music is being paid for again, but that it be locked up and no competition allowed, with people being forced to purchase every time they hear a piece of music .
And I know you continue to be dishonest and write things that are going to get you in trouble. Just remember that they were your own boneheaded choices.
Considering how the album performed commercially (quite well globally, hell, 1.3 million sold in the US in 4 months, 18th highest selling in the UK) I don't see why they would be suing this guy.
If they have the metrics from the downloads (how many were seeded from the time the guy seeded it until even 2012) we could draw some interesting correlations with the data shown here:
Do you honestly expect us to repeat our suggestions every reply you give? Each person reiterating the same "our suggestions" message gets tiring fast!
"Don't do what you're doing, " but look around on here, even this article has comments from me that give suggestions to ways forward.
I grow tired of re-writing it so you can deny it, much like the person now calling Mike a chicken.
I'm not repeating myself. You can easily click on my profile (refer to comment you replied to for profile link as I have not bothered to sign in at the time of posting nor to 'take ownership' of this comment at this time) and see my comments.
If you choose not to, that's not my problem, but stop the "you only tell us we're doing it wrong but never tell us how to do it right" bullshit. We have been, you just don't listen!
Where does it say that we don't believe in any enforcement? Commercial infringement requires enforcement.
Piracy requires being creative and giving people simple, easy means that do not require credit cards, unrestricted, has the ENTIRE catalog, even shit no one listened to the first time.
CwF+RtB was already said to NOT eliminate piracy, but to get people paid in spite of piracy.
"Giving people an option that they like WILL reduce piracy and put money into the artists pockets (and rights holders)."
No where does it say that CwF+RtB will "stop all piracy." That is not the goal! If it is, like I said, you will never attain it!
Where's your citation to "the guy in Texas" and "Ninjavideo" making "hundreds of thousands of dollars." ?
Is it like the supposed hundreds of millions that The Pirate Bay was making, only to be proven in a court of law that such numbers did NOT exist and they required a financial backer for that very reason (otherwise they would have paid for upgrades with their own profits)?
Your claims need to be backed up by facts, not speculation or numbers pulled from the air.
Enforcement isn't the solution, that's what you don't get. Mike has said (I can't remember the number of times because it was too many) that he doesn't know the right way to enforce because enforcing doesn't work!
Enforcement means are already at crazy levels and yet it has done SFA to encourage people to buy. In fact, it's done the opposite.
CwF+RtB IS how you accomplish the desired goal, which isn't to curb piracy, but to get artists paid!
If your goal is to eliminate piracy, you still won't solve the issue of getting artists paid. Or even rights holders paid because you'll piss people off who won't buy anything (or trade/share it either) from major labels. You'll still be fucking broke!
Enforcement will not stop piracy!
Giving people an option that they like WILL reduce piracy and put money into the artists pockets (and rights holders).
That's what we've been advocating and that's what we've been outlining with CwF+RtB and with the case studies and articles.
Yet you still think enforcement is the only means, hence why you and the labels and studios will never get it and never even curb piracy.
More Merger-related layoffs (1999) http://www.mbsolutions.com/articles/merger_mayhem.html
"When all is said and done Seagram will issue pinks slips to over 3,000 employees worldwide (including many middle managers and a number of executives) and let go of 300 artists by the end of this year."
Read the rest of the article for some realities of "the old boss."
Like:
The statistics on record sales are dismal. According to the Recording Industry Association of America, 9 out of 10 new record releases fail to recoup their production costs. Nine out of ten &endash; that's a mortality rate that would easily sink any other business. But because of the music's profit-to-cost ratios it's been allowed to exist. One hit fills the coffers fast.
Based on personal observations of Warner Bros. releases over a four month period, I noticed that the label averages 25-30 new releases per month. That's more than one per working day. There's little chance record company marketing departments can give more than scant attention to most of these records. There is simply not enough time nor people on staff to form a strategic plan and then effectively work that plan. Most new artist releases are given a generic marketing plan and thrown against the wall, while the label crosses its fingers hoping they stick.
Could that be why so many fail to sell? Could that be why people prefer singles to albums?
Faced with this tough reality, the music industry is now downsizing into a more compact, cost-effective version of its former obese self. Big Mac-sized marketing campaigns are out (or, at least, not quite the priority they were) and "we-care-because-you-do" artist development is coming back in as the music industry wakes up to the fact that bands cannot live on hype alone.
Mergers, Consolidations, Layoffs: step by step through the business
[edit]1991
"Synergetic" merger (by Sony) August 11, 1991 Sony attempts to create "synergy", by merging content companies (CBS Records), (Columbia pictures) with their electronics company. "Never again would something like the Betamax machine languish for want of products." However, in the earlier 90s, DAT recorders languished for exactly that reason. In 1991 (for many reasons) they were drowning in debt and in trouble.
Nicholas Garnett heads International Federation of Phonographic IndustriesNovember 16, 1991
[edit]1992
More synergetic mergers by Bertelsmann (buying RCA Records, the Literary Guild and the book publishers Bantam, Doubleday and Dell), Matsushita (buying MCA), Sony (bought Columbia Pictures) October 18, 1992 Clive Davis, president of Arista Records, owned by Bertelsmann
Branson selling Virgin March 5, 1992
Blockbuster buys Sound Warehouse and Music Plus October 20, 1992
Polygram buys Interscope August 11, 1992
INSIDE: Time Warner/EMI merger Actual article:1/24/2000[1]
Bronfmen buys Warner November 24, 2003[1]
EMI (still) in trouble January 13, 2007
[edit]Probably uninteresting
Polygram buys Andrew Lloyd Webber's company August 6, 1991
Now, how many of those layoffs were blamed on music piracy before filesharing even became popular? Wouldn't that be an interesting data question to answer.
Consolidations are nothing new, Indie labels do the same, to cut costs and maximize profits. The point is, while we're not denying filesharing has hurt the industry we question the EXTENT to which piracy has hurt the industry.
The industry doesn't like competition and wants total control so they can go back to "being the old boss." And things will be much worse than before! So the industry likes to blame everything on filesharing.
How about home videos and home theatre systems? Think that took money away from cinemas and music sales? How about singles from iTunes instead of albums, of course singles don't cost the same price as an album, so revenue will be down. How about videogames? Those damn consoles are so freaking addictive it's insane, they even have camps in China trying to beat the addiction. Think the money went to that instead of music?
So even if people "did without" (aka didn't file share) the music industry and movie industry would STILL see reduced sales! People are spending their money elsewhere.
If you buy a home theatre system, you may rent (brick and mortar and then iTunes and NetFlix or borrow from library or buy what's on sale only). That's money NOT gone to cinema because you spent it on sound system and larger screen TV.
Same goes for gaming consoles.
Not to mention the death of the record store is partly due to a) increased rent, b) competition from department stores (Walmart, BestBuy, Target, Zellers, etc...), c) big chain stores like HMV (whom buy in bulk and save $$ and also sell videos and posters).
There are so many factors, it's not just filesharing. To think it's only filesharing that causes layoffs is really being naive.
Hell, while searching for those articles I saw loads of layoffs form industries who are NOT subject to filesharing consequences (automotive - hurt by competition and economic downturns, computer - off-shoring the manufacturing, just to name two).
Look at the mergers that happened in the 80's and 90's, provided in some of the links I posted, you'll see that too results in many layoffs. What about the latest, post-filesharing mergers? Same thing, where possible to cut costs, they do it!
But but if you don't set an example, the others will just thieve and thieve and there will be no music created anywhere, ever! It's all going to be gone, nothing new created, no more culture, we'll all just become robots without emotion, like Equilibrium (movie - cool fight scenes).
So you see you MUST go for blood (if public executions were possible, they'd go for that too!).
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re:
So sorry, you fail yet again. And you're just so intelligent too, simply amazing.
Some creators bust their ass, many do NOT!
Fruits of their labour forever? Yeah I don't think so and neither does the general public. Want to get paid? Work, and keep working, not once and think you deserve a free ride for the rest of your life.
Want funds for your kids? Work and save, like everyone else.
"This stuff isn't hard" but apparently it is for you to grasp.
And finally you can't understand anything, it reads just fine, but clearly you're incompetent so let me translate:
"However, I believe in being humble and busting your ass is the only way to be worth something." - pretty much self explanatory, no confusion or uncertain direction. 1) Be humble and 2) Bust your ass at all you do!
" Busting your ass though, alone, does not mean you deserve to be paid." - again very self explanatory. 1) You don't deserve to be paid simply because you worked hard. Which means I work hard at what is relevant and needed, that's called working smart. Working hard at something no one wants or can use is stupid.
"No one owes you a living, you have to earn it! I do, thank you very much." -- Again, reiterates the points above.
Is that clear? If not, I don't care, anyone who isn't being disingenuous clearly gets it.
Whatever, you're a complete waste of time.
On the post: Yes, The US Industrial Revolution Was Built On Piracy And Fraud
Re:
He's just arguing that people who claim piracy prevents innovation and patents support innovation are full of absolute bullshit.
But thanks for twisting words.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
However, I believe in being humble and busting your ass is the only way to be worth something. Busting your ass though, alone, does not mean you deserve to be paid.
No one owes you a living, you have to earn it! I do, thank you very much.
I pay people for their creative output if I like it, I don't download or listen to it or watch it if I don't like it. I don't like paying for DVD's that are full of 20 minutes of unskippable ads and piracy lectures. That makes me want to go find the pirated version, which contains the "content" I want, not the horseshit ads and lectures about piracy. Especially when they are bullshit to begin with.
So you're wrong on every front. But thanks for coming out.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Too many factors came in to play, from suddenly no one needed to spend $18 on a whole "album" when they only wanted 2 songs ($2 revenue - that's $16 "lost" revenue do to industry crap - not every album is crap, but a statistically significant, very large, amount is!), to video games, to home theatre, to streaming (legal and otherwise), to every stupid band from the 80's who hasn't released anything since then going on tour to generate income while dropping the revenue new artists would have if they could tour --- there's only so much $$ people have regardless of what the RIAA thinks, to economic downturns, to exposure and competition from indie artists (not just those on indie labels, many of which are owned by RIAA labels) and true indie artists who self publish, to Spotify, etc..
Too many factors but rather than say "well it's a combination of things, part of which is our own fault for not listening to Todd Rundgren, let alone Silicon Valley upstarts we sued or muscled out of business - RICO?" they say "Blame Piracy!"
That's you! That's your same crap. Don't acknowledge the other factors, piracy is an easy sell to ignorant people (artists who don't take the time to read everything they can - positive and negative, label execs who listen to lawyers who need the execs to pay them salaries so they distort facts and manipulate data, and politicians who if not bought by campaign contributions are muscled through connections or offered jobs if they "play along").
On the post: Swedish BitTorrent User Accused Of Sharing Beyonce Album, Hit By $233,000 Lawsuit From Sony
Re: Re: Industry Worker
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Stop expecting people to spoon-feed you. Do a little research instead of sitting there like a baby expected to be waited on hand-and-foot.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
For example, when they sued Napster and threatened to shut it down, people jumped on pirating like mad. Then more sites showed up. The more they took down, the more showed up.
How about the raw data around The Pirate Bay trial, remember when they were on trial and the file sharing numbers skyrocketed? How about announcements of suing people, yeah, same result - skyrocketed.
So yes, being a douche and trying to beat people into submission has INCREASED piracy - part of that was the awareness of free stuff as a result of all the media coverage. Part of that due to anger from those who used to purchase.
Technology is not driving the proliferation of piracy, draconian enforcement has a greater impact on that.
Technology has enabled anyone to write, record and release, self publishing means no more gatekeepers! That's what technology has brought you!
You sound like the ghost of Vivendi.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
you're starting from the wrong premise: that we do not need "enforcement."
This, in a nutshell, demonstrates why you're fringe, and ultimately doomed to fail.
You will likely rant every day for the rest of your life against piracy, and it is going to accomplish absolutely nothing. Piracy is not going to ever go away. Ever. And your life will ultimately be viewed as one ginormous waste of time that was spent attempting to harm the few rights artists and creators possess and the public.
It might be understandable for a person to suggest law enforcement does work if that person was ignorant of society and history, but when someone has a degree from a reputable university like yourself, it's just intellectually dishonest. Law enforcement is designed to be a deterrent to lawbreaking, and it works often enough that society has decided laws are good to have. That fact isn't even open to discussion. And when society determines the laws are useless and no longer relevant, the laws must be changed (eg: prohibition).
Law enforcement does get in the way of, say, the next Spotify. I think you just threw in a second point so you wouldn't have 'enforcement does work' hanging out by itself, looking ludicrous.
Enforcement has made pirating a more popular than ever. Perhaps not the hard-core sociopaths that derail this blog, but for many, it most certainly has. For a great many people, it has become less of a PITA to pay than pirate though it still has a long way to go , and enforcement has not played a huge role in that. And you know it.
You'll probably counter with, "i've been saying we've made it easier all along", to which I say: that new reality is here, and yet you're still bitching about copyright and enforcement. Your true motives are clearly not that music is being paid for again, but that it be locked up and no competition allowed, with people being forced to purchase every time they hear a piece of music .
And I know you continue to be dishonest and write things that are going to get you in trouble. Just remember that they were your own boneheaded choices.
On the post: Swedish BitTorrent User Accused Of Sharing Beyonce Album, Hit By $233,000 Lawsuit From Sony
Sold Well
If they have the metrics from the downloads (how many were seeded from the time the guy seeded it until even 2012) we could draw some interesting correlations with the data shown here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_(Beyoncé_Knowles_album)#Commercial_performance
On the post: Two And A Half Minute Video Explains How The Ability To Sell Stuff You Legally Purchased Is At Risk
Re:
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Do you honestly expect us to repeat our suggestions every reply you give? Each person reiterating the same "our suggestions" message gets tiring fast!
"Don't do what you're doing, " but look around on here, even this article has comments from me that give suggestions to ways forward.
I grow tired of re-writing it so you can deny it, much like the person now calling Mike a chicken.
I'm not repeating myself. You can easily click on my profile (refer to comment you replied to for profile link as I have not bothered to sign in at the time of posting nor to 'take ownership' of this comment at this time) and see my comments.
If you choose not to, that's not my problem, but stop the "you only tell us we're doing it wrong but never tell us how to do it right" bullshit. We have been, you just don't listen!
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And there's your closing.
How, exactly, do you expect people to engage in a healthy debate with you when you start by casting stones?
And to answer your question: any manner that is reasonable, does not violate rights, benefits the artists and the public.
Which means: not the current system!
On the post: Amanda Palmer On The True Nature Of Connecting With Fans: It's About Trust
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Amanda Palmer haters
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Piracy requires being creative and giving people simple, easy means that do not require credit cards, unrestricted, has the ENTIRE catalog, even shit no one listened to the first time.
CwF+RtB was already said to NOT eliminate piracy, but to get people paid in spite of piracy.
"Giving people an option that they like WILL reduce piracy and put money into the artists pockets (and rights holders)."
No where does it say that CwF+RtB will "stop all piracy." That is not the goal! If it is, like I said, you will never attain it!
Where's your citation to "the guy in Texas" and "Ninjavideo" making "hundreds of thousands of dollars." ?
Is it like the supposed hundreds of millions that The Pirate Bay was making, only to be proven in a court of law that such numbers did NOT exist and they required a financial backer for that very reason (otherwise they would have paid for upgrades with their own profits)?
Your claims need to be backed up by facts, not speculation or numbers pulled from the air.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Enforcement means are already at crazy levels and yet it has done SFA to encourage people to buy. In fact, it's done the opposite.
CwF+RtB IS how you accomplish the desired goal, which isn't to curb piracy, but to get artists paid!
If your goal is to eliminate piracy, you still won't solve the issue of getting artists paid. Or even rights holders paid because you'll piss people off who won't buy anything (or trade/share it either) from major labels. You'll still be fucking broke!
Enforcement will not stop piracy!
Giving people an option that they like WILL reduce piracy and put money into the artists pockets (and rights holders).
That's what we've been advocating and that's what we've been outlining with CwF+RtB and with the case studies and articles.
Yet you still think enforcement is the only means, hence why you and the labels and studios will never get it and never even curb piracy.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.mbsolutions.com/articles/merger_mayhem.html
"When all is said and done Seagram will issue pinks slips to over 3,000 employees worldwide (including many middle managers and a number of executives) and let go of 300 artists by the end of this year."
Read the rest of the article for some realities of "the old boss."
Like:
Could that be why so many fail to sell? Could that be why people prefer singles to albums?
And a nice summary by decade what's happened in the past.
http://www.playlistresearch.com/recordindustry.htm
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.mail-archive.com/postcard2@u.washington.edu/msg03360.html (1995)
http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/recording-industry-layoffs (1988, 1994, 1995)
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CharlesGillingham/Drafts/Timeline_of_the_music_industry
Now, how many of those layoffs were blamed on music piracy before filesharing even became popular? Wouldn't that be an interesting data question to answer.
Consolidations are nothing new, Indie labels do the same, to cut costs and maximize profits. The point is, while we're not denying filesharing has hurt the industry we question the EXTENT to which piracy has hurt the industry.
The industry doesn't like competition and wants total control so they can go back to "being the old boss." And things will be much worse than before! So the industry likes to blame everything on filesharing.
How about home videos and home theatre systems? Think that took money away from cinemas and music sales? How about singles from iTunes instead of albums, of course singles don't cost the same price as an album, so revenue will be down. How about videogames? Those damn consoles are so freaking addictive it's insane, they even have camps in China trying to beat the addiction. Think the money went to that instead of music?
So even if people "did without" (aka didn't file share) the music industry and movie industry would STILL see reduced sales! People are spending their money elsewhere.
If you buy a home theatre system, you may rent (brick and mortar and then iTunes and NetFlix or borrow from library or buy what's on sale only). That's money NOT gone to cinema because you spent it on sound system and larger screen TV.
Same goes for gaming consoles.
Not to mention the death of the record store is partly due to a) increased rent, b) competition from department stores (Walmart, BestBuy, Target, Zellers, etc...), c) big chain stores like HMV (whom buy in bulk and save $$ and also sell videos and posters).
There are so many factors, it's not just filesharing. To think it's only filesharing that causes layoffs is really being naive.
Hell, while searching for those articles I saw loads of layoffs form industries who are NOT subject to filesharing consequences (automotive - hurt by competition and economic downturns, computer - off-shoring the manufacturing, just to name two).
Look at the mergers that happened in the 80's and 90's, provided in some of the links I posted, you'll see that too results in many layoffs. What about the latest, post-filesharing mergers? Same thing, where possible to cut costs, they do it!
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Take a look at when those layoffs started.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re:
So you see you MUST go for blood (if public executions were possible, they'd go for that too!).
Next >>