If you REALLY want the numbers, you'd have to sequester all of the data, all of it!
All the shippings from 1970 forward. Every year, every location, globally.
All the reported sales. All the reported income from each sale, sale prices, which stores (Mom and Pop or Walmart), artist contracts, lawyer fees, every employee salary, amounts paid to promotion, amounts paid to studios, amounts collected and paid by artist.
You'd need all of their data and you will NEVER get it! For one, they don't have it all and they don't want the truth to be revealed.
That's just roughed generic total data, not even the full demographics of the sales (such as what numbers of albums released in 1970 are selling in 1999, aggregated by format).
If you're up for a major hack-a-thon and assume the risk (as hacking to steal information is illegal) and you can find people capable of doing such things (likely most stuff is still done on paper and pencil to prevent such hacks from being possible - or we would have heard of someone trying by now), you'd be able to get it all. All!!! Probably take you at least a year to process and categorize that data too.
But wow, all that raw data would silence so many - at the same time it would be manipulated by "experts" in the industry who know how it "should be calculated" like they do in Hollywood now. Along with the paycheques to politicians, the "committees" who consult "industry experts" (aka non-economists but lawyers), would conclude everything is as Hollywood/Music Industry says - take their money and retire.
Don't be so naive. They bought Congress. Chris Dodd, who happened to have received (from banks and hollywood - combined) over $4 million in campaign contributions. That was exposed during the whole 2008 economic tank-mess.
Re: "Of course, none of this should be remotely surprising."
If you read what Mike has suggested, you would know he already answered what he'd like to see done.
He's answered stupid "you didn't answer me" comments like yours so many times it is getting tiring.
Maybe Mike should just copy-paste a response from before? Why should he bother telling you the same damn things over and over when you refuse to listen and just attack?
That's why you get called a shill.
To your question:
0) Stop suing/prepetuating copyright with extensions - set it to a reasonable amount
1) Stop copyrighting works already in the public domain
2) Stop region blocking, DRM, pushing forth ridiculous laws that don't help society as they were first intended
3) Start listening to customers by providing services that are easy to use and have the full movie selection - that means 2000 NetFlix movies (Canada number) is way way below the actual count - 200 000 titles is much better
4) Start offering additional means for consumers to purchase, not just copies, but even investment in new films with free cinema tickets or free downloads (bonus not just copies) without worry that some might make it online
5) Start helping existing services by not threatening them with legal death because they can't afford to pay you absurd $$$ you think you're entitled to
6) Create films with substance, which don't require $100million budgets, which have fully developed characters, a lot less gratuitous violence and sex
7) Pay the damn people who bust their ass to make something from nothing
That's just a few points of the general consensus on this site, and Mike's views are similar on some points - I am not Mike so I won't claim it to be an exact match.
Why not shock the shit out of every reader and NOT counter with your usual banter, actually read what people have written, respond intelligently, and actually thank people for having an opinion different from yours and sharing it nicely.
Flagging as "stupid retard wrote here" does NOT block anyone from viewing the content of said post.
Very few comment-permitted sites do such things, most block or monitor and remove disagreeable/offensive content.
In fact, reported and shrunk posts are actually attractive, because other readers expand them to see what was reported.
Sometimes it is abused, yes, but most of the time, no, it is appropriate as some idiot is just repeating the same trash: ad-hominem attacks, strawman fallacies, appeal to authority fallacies, or just outlandish nonsense.
It's simply a means of saying "this content is not productive, read at your own risk." Which is technically a form of censorship, but NO ONE IS DEPRIVED Of the right to read that crap!
It's simply an attempt to keep people from derailing threads, but obviously it doesn't work that well given all the bullshit that happens (mostly directed at Mike of course).
And it is just bullshit! Nothing but bullshit attacks.
Disagreements that are intelligent are met accordingly.
Douchebaggery is met with the same in response.
AGAIN, the tone is set by the poster, NOT the article! This is a happy article, yet we have assholish posting from certain people, which almost demands assholish responses. The fact that so many here do bite their tongue is amazing, considering the crap that is launched around.
LOL! I think your arguments are silly. So what? Way to play the "holier than thou" card. You've always got that one at the ready. The angry one is you, lashing out at the TD community, suggesting that we doesn't have even marginal talent based on some criteria you made up ad hoc. The angry one is you, David. Your whole blog reads like the diary of a man who's pissed off at the world. Saying a couple positive things here and there doesn't take away from the fact that you more often than not are lashing out at the world, telling us all how smart you are and how you'd do everything better than the person you're ragging on. And when someone dares challenge you on the merits, you lash out in anger and then run away before you concede an inch. It's amazing fun for me to watch. Then you censor the comments on your Trichordist site (and sister sites you like to link to giving the illusion of more support than you really have) and openly admit to it but get pissed when someone allows your comments but marks them low on other sites. Way to be a hypocrite.
For the numbers going up, which markets (geographically)?
Many countries are growing their Internet usage, but it isn't always through traditional laptop/desktop users. Mobile users (tablets and phones) on the dramatic rise.
So which other markets - which software? OS's or apps? Mobile apps or desktop/laptop software? Movies are easy to stream now on mobile devices too. No need for DVD burners or laptop/desktop devices.
The devil is in the details.
If the "industries" could only look at the damn details they'd maybe get a clue and maybe they'd see what people want, which isn't free, just unlocked and reasonably priced.
Personally, I like DVD's, I don't have to deal with stupid pop-ups or slow internet access or grainy video or even have to subscribe to a limited selection.
I buy what I like or that's cheap and worth giving a try. If it's not cheap and I still want to try it (ie: $20) then I try the library. If it is good, I'll wait until it is reasonable, at $10. Wait longer and you get 2/$10 or 3/$10 or 2/$20 or 2/$15. If they are worth it, I buy it. I don't bother torrenting or dealing with streaming delays and pop-ups of casino sites or dating sies.
Point is - give the damn options - full selection, reasonable price. Sometimes I use iTunes, but I like the extra features and being able to watch part one night and the other part a few nights later -- infant crying makes that option a necessity and iTunes ain't configured for that option!
Too bad people who use the Pirate Bay for LEGAL distribution could not band together and form a class action lawsuit, claiming such actions:
a) kill competition - which is a violation of anti-competitive laws
b) hurt their income (more difficult to prove unless they share their $$$ data)
c) provides access where "regular" distribution channels do not exist
I am sure there are more, but big $$ lawyers are better at singing and dancing than the ones Linux Foundation/indie artists/indie authors, etc... can afford, even as a collective.
And these folks don't have politicians and judges and jurors in their back pockets like content industry groups do.
What does First Nations have to do with Mike being a Google Shill? Who listens to that music anyhow?
Piracy doesn't help anybody but Google and Mike Masnick.
And piracy only matters when it happens to American content. Only American creators are actually hurt by piracy because that's all that is pirated. Nothing else is pirated! Why? Because who wants anything that isn't American?
Way to go Mike, just keep promoting piracy while sitting on the fence of morality with Streisand affecting your angst against artists and authors, and you never debate me!
Mike, no matter how hard you try we know the truth!
You can't hide that you're on the fence with Barbara Streisand, not answering our questions, waiting to see the effect Google's pirated ad sites on profits maximization, $100 million per site. That's $40 billion dollars, 96% of which used to go to the Entertainment Industry!
Re: Re: Re: Has anyone else looked at the Dead Kennedys website?
As always, spouting things that are not true.
Shouldn't you be over at your trichordist site there CastleLowery, taking screenshots of The Pirate Bay ads and blaming Google (whom we've already proven is NOT running ads on those sites)?
New rant same as the old rant from you!
Maybe, just maybe, if you were not so damn bitter that people trade your work rather than pay for it, and maybe they would if you gave them a reason to buy, and maybe if you didn't attack potential customers, you wouldn't be in the situation you are in.
You know what though? I bet if people stopped filesharing your work, completely, and likely sales would drop as a result, you'd still bitch and moan rather than do something about it.
It is your choice! Adapt or vanish in the quicksand of your own making.
Technically, that money goes to the label if the artist is on a label and many on iTunes (not sure of the ratio) are. I can't just put music up on iTunes, I need to use Tunecore or CDBaby or join a label and have them do it.
So you see they get money from THEIR OWN SITES, in addition to licensing technology like Microsoft or any other technology company.
So because they made $40 billion, it MUST be from advertising on "pirate" sites they don't own but might collect a small revenue from for licensing the ad software usage, assuming those sites are even using Google's technology - which someone showed above that they ARE NOT.
So Google gets paid when you click on an ad on a non-Google site?
You sure about that? Can you post a link?
Or is it Google gets paid when an owner of a website SUBSCRIBES to Google's ad service and once the threshold has been paid to Google, the SITE OWNER gets the cash? Sorta like once you pay your CRM user license Microsoft allows you to deploy Internet Facing CRM instances, legally anyhow?
So if your CRM instance is behind a site that hosts or links to sites/users that host infringing content, by your right Microsoft is liable and makes billions by users who pay to access that site?
Care to show a breakdown of that $40 Billion rather that guess where it comes from?
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:
All the shippings from 1970 forward. Every year, every location, globally.
All the reported sales. All the reported income from each sale, sale prices, which stores (Mom and Pop or Walmart), artist contracts, lawyer fees, every employee salary, amounts paid to promotion, amounts paid to studios, amounts collected and paid by artist.
You'd need all of their data and you will NEVER get it! For one, they don't have it all and they don't want the truth to be revealed.
Remember the famous dropping sales - in dollars - that they promoted? It was actually data manipulation:
http://www.businessinsider.com/these-charts-explain-the-real-death-of-the-music-indus try-2011-2
That's just roughed generic total data, not even the full demographics of the sales (such as what numbers of albums released in 1970 are selling in 1999, aggregated by format).
If you're up for a major hack-a-thon and assume the risk (as hacking to steal information is illegal) and you can find people capable of doing such things (likely most stuff is still done on paper and pencil to prevent such hacks from being possible - or we would have heard of someone trying by now), you'd be able to get it all. All!!! Probably take you at least a year to process and categorize that data too.
But wow, all that raw data would silence so many - at the same time it would be manipulated by "experts" in the industry who know how it "should be calculated" like they do in Hollywood now. Along with the paycheques to politicians, the "committees" who consult "industry experts" (aka non-economists but lawyers), would conclude everything is as Hollywood/Music Industry says - take their money and retire.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now he's a mouthpiece for them.
On the post: Amanda Palmer On The True Nature Of Connecting With Fans: It's About Trust
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Amanda Palmer haters
On the post: Amanda Palmer On The True Nature Of Connecting With Fans: It's About Trust
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Amanda Palmer haters
Isn't that amazing, same group of people running multiple sites and linking to the same group of sites as "support" for their "data."
Sorry, that's nothing but a bunch of out-of-context quotes intended to spread misinformation. Very similar to the tactics used by CIA.
On the post: Hollywood Accounting Strikes Again: Universal Sued For Screwing Over Its Own Sister Company
Re: "Of course, none of this should be remotely surprising."
He's answered stupid "you didn't answer me" comments like yours so many times it is getting tiring.
Maybe Mike should just copy-paste a response from before? Why should he bother telling you the same damn things over and over when you refuse to listen and just attack?
That's why you get called a shill.
To your question:
0) Stop suing/prepetuating copyright with extensions - set it to a reasonable amount
1) Stop copyrighting works already in the public domain
2) Stop region blocking, DRM, pushing forth ridiculous laws that don't help society as they were first intended
3) Start listening to customers by providing services that are easy to use and have the full movie selection - that means 2000 NetFlix movies (Canada number) is way way below the actual count - 200 000 titles is much better
4) Start offering additional means for consumers to purchase, not just copies, but even investment in new films with free cinema tickets or free downloads (bonus not just copies) without worry that some might make it online
5) Start helping existing services by not threatening them with legal death because they can't afford to pay you absurd $$$ you think you're entitled to
6) Create films with substance, which don't require $100million budgets, which have fully developed characters, a lot less gratuitous violence and sex
7) Pay the damn people who bust their ass to make something from nothing
That's just a few points of the general consensus on this site, and Mike's views are similar on some points - I am not Mike so I won't claim it to be an exact match.
Why not shock the shit out of every reader and NOT counter with your usual banter, actually read what people have written, respond intelligently, and actually thank people for having an opinion different from yours and sharing it nicely.
On the post: Amanda Palmer On The True Nature Of Connecting With Fans: It's About Trust
Re: Re: Re:
A baseless comment illustrating you are exactly what you claim TD commentators to be.
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
Flagging as "stupid retard wrote here" does NOT block anyone from viewing the content of said post.
Very few comment-permitted sites do such things, most block or monitor and remove disagreeable/offensive content.
In fact, reported and shrunk posts are actually attractive, because other readers expand them to see what was reported.
Sometimes it is abused, yes, but most of the time, no, it is appropriate as some idiot is just repeating the same trash: ad-hominem attacks, strawman fallacies, appeal to authority fallacies, or just outlandish nonsense.
It's simply a means of saying "this content is not productive, read at your own risk." Which is technically a form of censorship, but NO ONE IS DEPRIVED Of the right to read that crap!
It's simply an attempt to keep people from derailing threads, but obviously it doesn't work that well given all the bullshit that happens (mostly directed at Mike of course).
And it is just bullshit! Nothing but bullshit attacks.
Disagreements that are intelligent are met accordingly.
Douchebaggery is met with the same in response.
AGAIN, the tone is set by the poster, NOT the article! This is a happy article, yet we have assholish posting from certain people, which almost demands assholish responses. The fact that so many here do bite their tongue is amazing, considering the crap that is launched around.
On the post: Amanda Palmer On The True Nature Of Connecting With Fans: It's About Trust
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Amanda Palmer haters
See, fits you perfectly!
On the post: Music Industry Data: Sales Up, Piracy Down... But It's Not Because Of Any 'Anti-Piracy' Efforts
OOTB?
Do you ever address the more than once (if that sometimes) in your rambles?
On the post: Music Industry Data: Sales Up, Piracy Down... But It's Not Because Of Any 'Anti-Piracy' Efforts
Many countries are growing their Internet usage, but it isn't always through traditional laptop/desktop users. Mobile users (tablets and phones) on the dramatic rise.
So which other markets - which software? OS's or apps? Mobile apps or desktop/laptop software? Movies are easy to stream now on mobile devices too. No need for DVD burners or laptop/desktop devices.
The devil is in the details.
If the "industries" could only look at the damn details they'd maybe get a clue and maybe they'd see what people want, which isn't free, just unlocked and reasonably priced.
Personally, I like DVD's, I don't have to deal with stupid pop-ups or slow internet access or grainy video or even have to subscribe to a limited selection.
I buy what I like or that's cheap and worth giving a try. If it's not cheap and I still want to try it (ie: $20) then I try the library. If it is good, I'll wait until it is reasonable, at $10. Wait longer and you get 2/$10 or 3/$10 or 2/$20 or 2/$15. If they are worth it, I buy it. I don't bother torrenting or dealing with streaming delays and pop-ups of casino sites or dating sies.
Point is - give the damn options - full selection, reasonable price. Sometimes I use iTunes, but I like the extra features and being able to watch part one night and the other part a few nights later -- infant crying makes that option a necessity and iTunes ain't configured for that option!
On the post: Swedish Pirate Party Stops Hosting The Pirate Bay, But Intends To Sue Anti-Piracy Organization For Unlawful Coercion
Re: Re: Re: Re:
FTFY
On the post: Swedish Pirate Party Stops Hosting The Pirate Bay, But Intends To Sue Anti-Piracy Organization For Unlawful Coercion
Re: Re: "figuring out ways to help provide the public what they want."
On the post: Swedish Pirate Party Stops Hosting The Pirate Bay, But Intends To Sue Anti-Piracy Organization For Unlawful Coercion
Too Bad
a) kill competition - which is a violation of anti-competitive laws
b) hurt their income (more difficult to prove unless they share their $$$ data)
c) provides access where "regular" distribution channels do not exist
I am sure there are more, but big $$ lawyers are better at singing and dancing than the ones Linux Foundation/indie artists/indie authors, etc... can afford, even as a collective.
And these folks don't have politicians and judges and jurors in their back pockets like content industry groups do.
On the post: Indian Music Industry Exec Says The Unthinkable: 'Internet Piracy Is A Good Thing'
AJ_AC_OhBlueBalledBob
Piracy doesn't help anybody but Google and Mike Masnick.
And piracy only matters when it happens to American content. Only American creators are actually hurt by piracy because that's all that is pirated. Nothing else is pirated! Why? Because who wants anything that isn't American?
Way to go Mike, just keep promoting piracy while sitting on the fence of morality with Streisand affecting your angst against artists and authors, and you never debate me!
On the post: When Google Can't Figure Out Its Own Webspam Rules, Perhaps It Needs To Rethink The Rules
Fencing with Google
You can't hide that you're on the fence with Barbara Streisand, not answering our questions, waiting to see the effect Google's pirated ad sites on profits maximization, $100 million per site. That's $40 billion dollars, 96% of which used to go to the Entertainment Industry!
On the post: Dead Kennedys Guitarist Joins Crusade Against Ad Networks & YouTube Despite Understanding Neither
Re: Re: Re: Has anyone else looked at the Dead Kennedys website?
Shouldn't you be over at your trichordist site there CastleLowery, taking screenshots of The Pirate Bay ads and blaming Google (whom we've already proven is NOT running ads on those sites)?
New rant same as the old rant from you!
Maybe, just maybe, if you were not so damn bitter that people trade your work rather than pay for it, and maybe they would if you gave them a reason to buy, and maybe if you didn't attack potential customers, you wouldn't be in the situation you are in.
You know what though? I bet if people stopped filesharing your work, completely, and likely sales would drop as a result, you'd still bitch and moan rather than do something about it.
It is your choice! Adapt or vanish in the quicksand of your own making.
On the post: RIAA: Google Isn't Trying Hard Enough To Make Piracy Disappear From The Internet
Re: Re:
On the post: Dead Kennedys Guitarist Joins Crusade Against Ad Networks & YouTube Despite Understanding Neither
Re: Re: Re: Re: AdSense - how it works
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=GOOG+Income+Statement&annual
Or this:
Three Months Ended
June 30, Six Months Ended
June 30,
2008 2009 2008 2009
Advertising revenues:
Google web sites
$ 3,530,145 $ 3,652,628 $ 6,930,550 $ 7,345,451
Google Network web sites
1,655,280 1,683,500 3,341,421 3,321,542
Total advertising revenues
5,185,425 5,336,128 10,271,971 10,666,993
Licensing and other revenues
181,787 186,769 281,284 364,894
Revenues
$ 5,367,212 $ 5,522,897 $ 10,553,255 $ 11,031,887
From 2009:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312509150129/dex992.htm
So you see they get money from THEIR OWN SITES, in addition to licensing technology like Microsoft or any other technology company.
So because they made $40 billion, it MUST be from advertising on "pirate" sites they don't own but might collect a small revenue from for licensing the ad software usage, assuming those sites are even using Google's technology - which someone showed above that they ARE NOT.
On the post: Dead Kennedys Guitarist Joins Crusade Against Ad Networks & YouTube Despite Understanding Neither
Re: Re: Re: Re: AdSense - how it works
You sure about that? Can you post a link?
Or is it Google gets paid when an owner of a website SUBSCRIBES to Google's ad service and once the threshold has been paid to Google, the SITE OWNER gets the cash? Sorta like once you pay your CRM user license Microsoft allows you to deploy Internet Facing CRM instances, legally anyhow?
So if your CRM instance is behind a site that hosts or links to sites/users that host infringing content, by your right Microsoft is liable and makes billions by users who pay to access that site?
Care to show a breakdown of that $40 Billion rather that guess where it comes from?
On the post: Dead Kennedys Guitarist Joins Crusade Against Ad Networks & YouTube Despite Understanding Neither
Re: Re: AdSense - how it works
So where's your proof of billions of dollars?
Remember the Pirate Bay trial, they couldn't find the proof either because IT DID NOT EXIST!
Next >>