What happen to "advertizing is a content" idea? What happen to "access to musician is a scarcity"?
I think there should be paradigm shift for both things.
"Advertizing" to make you more and better known, not part of the final product that should be sold. If people like your music, they will buy it. If not, you should keep on with your life. Besides, there's always been Crowd-Advertizing that spread the product around your own contacts and made it more known. I don't understand why eventually the Publishers want to kill a practice that has been around for like since the first days of humanity.
"Access to musician is a scarcity". With Technology, you can copy the tracks without any cost or loss involved, at the same quality as the original. I know that there is still the "dilluted-value" fear, but here is where you ask yourself if that's really happening or it's all the opposite. Time after time it's been proven that a content that gets spread a lot improves it's value.
I don't think that idea "founder goes to jail" is what "legal" means.
It depends on what does the government defines what's legal and not. Such is a flaw of the current democracy system. If you can influence the government, you can write the rules, even if the do not make any sense or are unconstitutional.
Mike, do you sleep with her or something? Please find another example, this one is overused.
*avoiding the ad-hom, there is no point to refute something like this*
Still, there has been more than one successful cases of Crowdfunding and CwF+RtB being told here. Amanda is probably the most prominent of them all.
Like I say before, option c) is begging. I'm glad it's working for Amanda.
Saying that "Crowfunding = Begging" is like saying "Copyright-Infrignment = Steal".
"Copyright isn't just some magic thing to lock things up content - it's also the basis for an entire marketplace."
If a law is required to create a marketplace... Wouldn't this marketplace be like a new-born that needs to be plugged to a machine his/her entire life to survive? Wouldn't the less cruel solution be to let it die naturally instead of prolonging his/her life and suffering?
Leaving the analogy aside, I believe society as a whole has already answered this, as we see the "Art and culture" shifting from the marketplace Copyright created to another one.
The only result out of it is forcing everything into sneakernets and searching/consuming stuff without a restrictive copyright. In the end, the current copyright will become so poisoning for any kind of content it applies, that anyone will look to get rid of that before anything else.
About the note, I agree. This can be a great advertising opportunity for Samsung.
Also, why Apple chose suing? Given their size and position in the market, possibly it has grown so big that it's now afraid to lose that position, hence using the legal system as a threat (almost like bullying).
What actually leaves me thinking is... why does the USA's legal system enters into this game, to the point that it even seems to encourage it?
Actually, there is a lot of support for the "Right's Holders", but it's not in a way you want to hear it. Here we say: "Change your busisness model, you have the tools, technology, money and power to do it. It's easy and really cost/effective for everyone. Do it before it's too late for you."
Or you might be expecting something like: "Hooray for this busisness model!!! DVDs/VCRs/Blu-Ray with DRM and lots of FBI warnings and never-ending trailers are the lastest innovation of this world. You are our heroes!!!"
There are ways where religion can live with critical thinking (or at least that's the way I've been taught during my pre-bachelor course of Teology). In fact, when a person thinks critically, they have another weapon to reinforce their faith and believes, if they choose so.
Unless you want to have "fanatics". They do not need that.
If rights are property, as you say, that means that the government is in position to sieze, capture or take away my rights, if they see fit.
In fact, this happens on the common criminal situations (Tangible-Stuff Theft, Murder, Treachery, Blackmail, and so many others). Possibly will also happen with "Copyright Infrigment" if it's criminalistically penalized as it was propoused many times in the past (but thankfully it has not happened yet).
Considering the fact that there are major corporative representatives buying different types of enforcement or laws, it's not farfetched to say that this can even reach the Orwell's 1984 scenario eventually, under the presumption of certain well-placed crisis (War on [insert theme here]).
In all and all, this means that maybe laws do not live up to today's living standards.
To add to the comment from AC Mar 19th, 2012 @ 8:38pm, the technology to do this is already there. For more information, read: Mobile Ad-hoc networking.
Knowing the track of the MPAA, the 25PB data search will be with a half-assed automated system and it will lead to lots of collateral damage and innocents to trial.
"That said, along with Mike, I wonder what the IP extremists and companies will do when these kits become more popular and available and the price of 3D printers decline."
Compare the 3D-printer to a rampant pedophile... or start locking it out from the markets due to possible children hazard (See Kinder Surprise).
"In the movie business (or music for that matter) you have a unique product."
The idea that concieves it is unique, but the information that actually contains and transports it isn't. And even better, this information can be replicated without any cost at all. See how I'm quoting you, it's your idea, turned in information and being now replicated in this comment.
"that piracy has created expectations that cannot be met, on price, delivery, and availability"
Your argument has commited suicide just here...
If a "casual pirate" with a low budget PC can do it, why not a multi-millionare industry who can afford complete Workstations and professional IT staffs with ease?
"Any time the movie companies try to run their business in a profitable manner, they have failed to meet the expectations."
Shouldn't they try to actually reinvent their busisness plan to accomodate to the 21st century? And what kind of expectations they have failed to meet? If you mean "Quality of the Content", I don't think piracy is the issue here.
"It's not hard to understand - the competition for content providers right now is their own product, free to get, simple to obtain, and often delivered before the real product even hits the market. No matter what they do (short of giving it all away all the time) they cannot compete, plain and simple."
Then they have a real problem defining who are their competitors and I think they should start there because that's one of the basics in any type of busisness.
Delivered before their product? I'll assume you don't speak about "leaks" here. Still, they send the product with release windows. I could understand the difficulties of selling the product everywhere IF IT WAS COMPLETELY PHYSICAL, but it isn't and in this digital era there is no excuse for them to do that, specially considering the technology we have and how it's available to anyone at almost no cost.
Re: Re: Re:
Re: "not relevant to about 75% of them."
The Betamax case wants a word with you.
Re: Re: Re: Let's not "push it"
I think there should be paradigm shift for both things.
"Advertizing" to make you more and better known, not part of the final product that should be sold. If people like your music, they will buy it. If not, you should keep on with your life. Besides, there's always been Crowd-Advertizing that spread the product around your own contacts and made it more known. I don't understand why eventually the Publishers want to kill a practice that has been around for like since the first days of humanity.
"Access to musician is a scarcity". With Technology, you can copy the tracks without any cost or loss involved, at the same quality as the original. I know that there is still the "dilluted-value" fear, but here is where you ask yourself if that's really happening or it's all the opposite. Time after time it's been proven that a content that gets spread a lot improves it's value.
I don't think that idea "founder goes to jail" is what "legal" means.
It depends on what does the government defines what's legal and not. Such is a flaw of the current democracy system. If you can influence the government, you can write the rules, even if the do not make any sense or are unconstitutional.
Mike, do you sleep with her or something? Please find another example, this one is overused.
*avoiding the ad-hom, there is no point to refute something like this*
Still, there has been more than one successful cases of Crowdfunding and CwF+RtB being told here. Amanda is probably the most prominent of them all.
Like I say before, option c) is begging. I'm glad it's working for Amanda.
Saying that "Crowfunding = Begging" is like saying "Copyright-Infrignment = Steal".
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If a law is required to create a marketplace... Wouldn't this marketplace be like a new-born that needs to be plugged to a machine his/her entire life to survive? Wouldn't the less cruel solution be to let it die naturally instead of prolonging his/her life and suffering?
Leaving the analogy aside, I believe society as a whole has already answered this, as we see the "Art and culture" shifting from the marketplace Copyright created to another one.
Re:
As pointless as the other "wars" were/are.
(untitled comment)
Also, why Apple chose suing? Given their size and position in the market, possibly it has grown so big that it's now afraid to lose that position, hence using the legal system as a threat (almost like bullying).
What actually leaves me thinking is... why does the USA's legal system enters into this game, to the point that it even seems to encourage it?
Re:
Or you might be expecting something like: "Hooray for this busisness model!!! DVDs/VCRs/Blu-Ray with DRM and lots of FBI warnings and never-ending trailers are the lastest innovation of this world. You are our heroes!!!"
Re: Re: Re: Real world skills
Unless you want to have "fanatics". They do not need that.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this the next bubble crushing economy in the future?
Source:
Diablo 3 - RMAH ToU
Re:
Re: Re: Re:
In fact, this happens on the common criminal situations (Tangible-Stuff Theft, Murder, Treachery, Blackmail, and so many others). Possibly will also happen with "Copyright Infrigment" if it's criminalistically penalized as it was propoused many times in the past (but thankfully it has not happened yet).
Considering the fact that there are major corporative representatives buying different types of enforcement or laws, it's not farfetched to say that this can even reach the Orwell's 1984 scenario eventually, under the presumption of certain well-placed crisis (War on [insert theme here]).
In all and all, this means that maybe laws do not live up to today's living standards.
Re:
/malemonk... And possibly this Trojan.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
THE.
WORST.
POSSIBLE.
THING."
/sarcasm
Re: I have a better title for this article
Because the TSA are the actual terrorists?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Re:
It would be interesting they might have to sue federal goverment members too.
Re: Re:
Compare the 3D-printer to a rampant pedophile... or start locking it out from the markets due to possible children hazard (See Kinder Surprise).
(untitled comment)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The idea that concieves it is unique, but the information that actually contains and transports it isn't. And even better, this information can be replicated without any cost at all. See how I'm quoting you, it's your idea, turned in information and being now replicated in this comment.
"that piracy has created expectations that cannot be met, on price, delivery, and availability"
Your argument has commited suicide just here...
If a "casual pirate" with a low budget PC can do it, why not a multi-millionare industry who can afford complete Workstations and professional IT staffs with ease?
"Any time the movie companies try to run their business in a profitable manner, they have failed to meet the expectations."
Shouldn't they try to actually reinvent their busisness plan to accomodate to the 21st century? And what kind of expectations they have failed to meet? If you mean "Quality of the Content", I don't think piracy is the issue here.
"It's not hard to understand - the competition for content providers right now is their own product, free to get, simple to obtain, and often delivered before the real product even hits the market. No matter what they do (short of giving it all away all the time) they cannot compete, plain and simple."
Then they have a real problem defining who are their competitors and I think they should start there because that's one of the basics in any type of busisness.
Delivered before their product? I'll assume you don't speak about "leaks" here. Still, they send the product with release windows. I could understand the difficulties of selling the product everywhere IF IT WAS COMPLETELY PHYSICAL, but it isn't and in this digital era there is no excuse for them to do that, specially considering the technology we have and how it's available to anyone at almost no cost.
Re:
It's really hard to believe he can say that with a straight face.
More comments from KelvinZevallos >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by KelvinZevallos.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt