Oh sweet irony
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Dec 03, 2011 7:49 AM EDT |
... |
| GERGE Dec 03, 2011 8:38 AM EDT |
muhahahahaha That is the only thing I am feeling right now. |
| Ridcully Dec 03, 2011 9:42 AM EDT |
Just as an aside, the Swiss have just agreed that downloading movies and music for personal use will remain legal: http://torrentfreak.com/swiss-govt-downloading-movies-and-mu... This looks like a "bad hair day" for both movies and music moguls. The Swiss have found out that the "piracy activities" of the Swiss public are actually complementary to their consumption of movies and music and has this advice: Quoting:The overall suggestion the Swiss government communicates to the entertainment industries is that they should adapt to the change in consumer behavior, or die. They see absolutely no need to change the law because downloading has no proven negative impact on the production of national culture. |
| helios Dec 03, 2011 10:56 AM EDT |
Why do I suddenly have cravings for chocolate and fine watches? |
| phsolide Dec 03, 2011 11:15 AM EDT |
It seems that this BREIN organization has fired the director that wanted 35% of the artist's money, just to help the artist in question get the money he was owed. That's a typical CYA move for an organization. I bet no substantial investigation will take place, nothing else about BREIN will change. After a while, something else will explode in the press, showing that BREIN is and was deeply corrupt all along. By that time, the "property" part of "IP" will be ingrained, too m any people's income (lawyers) will depend on the illogical and contradictory thicket of "IP" laws, and we'll never change them. I mourn for Western Civilization. It seems to be set on eating its young. |
| cr Dec 03, 2011 11:48 AM EDT |
Quoting: I mourn for Western Civilization. It seems to be set on eating its young.This is not news. What do you think the Sixties was about? |
| mrider Dec 03, 2011 11:50 AM EDT |
I can pull my car into my driveway and give it a nice wash and vacuuming - total outlay, maybe $.50 and 45 minutes to an hour of my time. There's an old fashioned car wash a few miles down the road from my house. The kind where one pulls up on one side of the building and the car gets vacuumed, and then it is put onto a rail mechanism and pulled around the building and washed by automatic means. Total cost, $15-$20 dollars (depending on what "extras" one purchases), and maybe 20 minutes. The car wash is constantly jammed full of cars, and the owners are probably making money hand over fist. How can they compete with virtually free? It's easy, and they do a FAR better job than one can do in a similar amount of time at home. The media companies need to understand that they are competing with free. Make it easier to pay a modest fee than it is to pirate and people will use the service and they will make money. EDIT: On a side note - I hope Melchior Rietveldt absolutely takes them to the cleaners. He should go for the same infringement fees that these folks go for. |
| cr Dec 03, 2011 12:11 PM EDT |
Quoting: The media companies need to understand that they are competing with free. Make it easier to pay a modest fee than it is to pirate and people will use the service and they will make money. Selling convenience, IOW. Red Hat does all right at it, and they're almost as pure a distribution channel as the major media firms (record labels included). That would require the media types to admit what business they're in, though, something they're not likely to do as their whole investment mindset is built around control of product creation. As long as they can pretend to represent The Artist, while keeping The Artist yoked to their turnstile, they've no reason to budge. I think it'll take some major success stories of artists establishing independent distribution-to-end-user channels (and making decent money at it), enough of them that they're no longer reported as anomalies, before they'll accept their diminished real role and stop trying to enforce the myth. |
| Ridcully Dec 03, 2011 8:46 PM EDT |
Thanks Helios.....been busy all morning carting water, took 5 minutes break and just looked at this thread and your reply. Laughter is always the best medicine and I admit I exploded with it. I needed that, and shortly I am off back to the outdoors and work. And I agree with "mrider" - instead of the present price gouging structures for movies and music, put a price on these items that makes them worth buying rather than downloading sometimes risky pirated stuff. Take movies for instance. A new movie will hit the shelves priced at roughly Australian $30, yet the same movie can be found selling about a year later for $15, and two years later for as little as $10. Now that tells me something very simple: the cost of making the dvd package is less than $10......it has to be. So who is getting the ripoff of $20 when the disk first comes out ??? I do know that the local chain store does put the new movies out for an initial one week at $20, then a week later, they are up to near $30.......Now, they won't be making a loss in that first week, that I am sure of. Somewhere, something is very, very wrong with the dvd movie pricing structure....The movie studios ? Distributors ? Stores ? ...... I really don't know, but something smells to high heaven....and they wonder why piracy continues when even Blind Freddy can see there is a nasty stench of overpricing. I think the Swiss have hit it in one: adapt to the new paradigm or die. Currently the movie makers and their distribution channels are trying to enforce a method of sales out of the 1960's, but it will not and cannot work on a structure designed to download and transfer data.....I keep hoping that the movie/music moguls will learn to adapt and use the new internet structures, but so far, the answer is no. |
| BernardSwiss Dec 03, 2011 9:09 PM EDT |
@mrider Thank you very much for an excellent alternative to the bottled water analogy. This is hardly the first time that the crusaders for stricter copyright and more draconian penalties for infringement, have been caught committing blatant "piracy" themselves. (Not that the **AA or European equivalents can be said to have good reputations for honesty, scrupulousness or fair play in the first place). Zombie copyright terms, retroactive copyright terms, DMCA, SOPA, PIPA make it clear that this is about monied political influence, rather than striking a rational let alone reasonable arrangement between society and artists. But I think my favourite example is still the attempt to claim copyright (and copyright infringement) over copyright notice. http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/dmca-nfl http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/03/21/law-professor-wendy-selt... Note that the copyright notice itself plainly exceeded the rights granted by copyright law, and that the claimant's response to the defendant's counter-claim actually contravened the DMCA law under which they were pursuing action. Par for the course, I'm afraid. |
| theBeez Dec 04, 2011 8:39 AM EDT |
@Ridcully
Well, somebody making money from first releases is not really my problem. My problem is that even OLD movies are market for prime prices, even - yes! - if they're in the PUBLIC DOMAIN! I've seen Reeker and Nosferatu movies doing $20. That's a rip-off! But it clearly shows how these companies work - as artist have been saying for years. If you break down the price of a CD or book you'll see that the author gets minimal payment. Even worse, in Holland artist have been SUED by these companies for offering THEIR songs for free. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!