Posts by robbery
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And that's about the worst argument I've ever heard in support of an industry.
really?
most industries have rules of use.
do you go into a petrol station, fill up then decide to drive off and not pay.
do you pick something up from a dairy and walk out the door without paying.
you probably could get away with it but the risk of getting caught is higher for breaking the rules of those industries at the moment. -
But if I do want to listen they are trying to force me to listen in a manner (and time) of their choosing.
well I don't think thats actually the objective, its more the result of not being able to implement the simple act of stopping people giving direct digital copies of the track to all their mates without the hassle. once again, not the idea of drm but the application of it is faulty.
when you go to a restaurant or a bar you have similar constrictions placed on you. you have to eat the food at the assigned table, drink alcohol bought at the bar etc.
consumers never had the right to get anything for free.
-
Is the answer then is to screw the legitimate consumers
who said that? all the points I've made have been to establish a transparent DRM rather than demonize it. no one's trying to screw the legitimate consumer and I think you know that. they're just trying to maintain a hold in the face of technology they can't keep up with.
-
captures just about all the attacks made on consumers by the music, film and software industries in the name of preventing piracy.
attacks???
thats a bit of a misleading term.
no ones forcing you to watch movies or listen to music,
there's plenty of other viable things to do with your time, gardening or home renovation are popular I've heard. -
That I know of,... I have actually been at peoples houses and found dubbed copies of local discs, there isn't the don't copy local loyalty we thought there was.
Gasp, and did anyone dare pick up a guitar in your presence and perform someone else's "intellectual property"?
there's a little more to it than that don. lets just say its the same as mr grigg attending a party and finding his labels catalogue neatly pirated,
not that I'm sure he or I particularly gave a shit but the point is the acceptance of piracy is far reaching even amongst friends of friends. make of that what you will.
its a comment on the acceptability of it, russell was inferring it was minimal even at extreme indie ends, and yes you'd be hard pushed to find many a nz release on file sharing programs but part of drm was to make discs un rippable, failed as that was. -
No, I think this is happening on P&D deals: if you signed away digital distribution you're liable to be fscked.
I only know of the sel dub one, and andrew kept himself in a good position on that one.
The truth is artists don't need to rely on majors anymore so why bring their evilness into the argument to justify the free for all.I'm not one to defend majors anyway. my only dealings with them have been unpleasant, paul ellis is a complete arse and I'll never forget the way he acted pre being a celeb asrse, but I'm not going to add to the myth of the faceless evil that justifies no rights for anyone.
The music I'm interested in doesn't come from majors anyway but it is going to be adversely affected by the perpetuation of the notion of music is for free, a loss leader, make the money from merch and touring, no one is hurt, they should do it cos they love it etc
from tom's link again
"Those numbers indicate that very few people want to pay for recorded music these days."
I think it more points that too many people are willing to steal as more and more people somehow think it's acceptable. It's not.
-
And not every unpermitted copy is a lost sale.
????
what do you mean? unless you're inferring that people fork up the cash for a copied disc at a later date. i'd like to see the figures on that one.how many sales does piracy really cost you?
That I know of,... I have actually been at peoples houses and found dubbed copies of local discs, there isn't the don't copy local loyalty we thought there was.
but I'm not arguing the points from my perspective, I'm looking at the implications for the big picture, which will trickle down to the smaller players. the justification of piracy based on the majors deserve it ignores the trickle down effect. everyone gets hurt by perpetuating the change of attitude to music is for free, and that no one is hurt by it except evil giants.
I do know what you're talking about re attending company paid for parties at the expense of the artists that we weren't strictly supposed to be at, but those days are long gone and even then they were the exception rather than the rule. a fun story to tell but if you're basing the future of music business models based on a few wayward exec decisions you can also apply that to japanese businessmen who put their hooker bills on their client entertainment budget. music isn't the only industry to miss use profits.
-
I've talked to people involved, and sighted some of the contracts and it is my understanding that the major label deals on download revenues are generally markedly worse for the artists than those from independent labels, the difference being as much as 25% vs. 50% of retail revenue.
you're forgetting that the major label fronts the cash for the venture. indies front the cash for theirs.
majors are just reclaiming the dosh for their investment, and any poor musician is going to resent that but its the same business practices that apply to all other forms of industry. if you don't like them taking thier money back then pay for it yourself and do all the distribution yourself too, and promotion etc, they don't do nothing for their cut as much as the myth would like us to believe -
a comment from tom's linked article that says people don't want to pay for music anymore
Not that I'm in complete support of DRM, but I think consumers have been way off base on this. Since when is it our right to get something for nothing?! I don't think this is good for the industry, but it's obviously where it's headed, making the entry barrier much tougher for new artists.
If only we could apply the difficult to police criteria to other industries I'd be driving a better car and eating myself into an early grave.
-
you're backing a scheme that is both inherently technically flawed and offers nothing to consumers. How on earth do you expect that to ever succeed?
I'm not backing anything. I'm raising issues being swept under the table with the oversimplification of a reasonably complex issue.
I can see why music creators would want to strive for some semblance of control of their works. I can see that if you poo poo DRM (an attempt to regain some sort of control) without offering any sort of alternative or noting why music creators need that control,
And demonising some over-hollywoodised image of a large music company and using that myth to justify a wholesale free-for-all regime affecting all the little players,all of those things are relevant, but that is an interesting way to look at musicsharing as unlicensed broadcasting.
I'd be interested in how you envisage administering licensing of the unlicensed, and creating a viable income stream for music creators and investors.