how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2008-04-03 13:19:37: Last week the music industry caused serious waves by announcing they'd created a new organization tasked with trying to implement a music "piracy tax. ..
| |
 modifiy
join:2001-04-13
Minneapolis, MN
 ·Qwest.net
 ·Comcast
| Almost the right idea 5 a month isn't bad, but if they were smart why the heck wouldn't they just open their own music store and charge 5 bucks a month for unlimited drm free music? Who wouldn't go for that? It doesn't make sence to "tax" us for it, but i dont think 5 bucks a month is unreasonable for all you can download as long as the quality is there. Sounds like they are becoming desperate. | |
| | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Re: Almost the right idea They want the guaranteed revenue stream- if they had to open their own online store to provide content, then they'd have to maintain a website, billing systems, have good quality files- argh, too much work, just give me money. | |
| | | modifiy
join:2001-04-13
Minneapolis, MN | Re: Almost the right idea Very true, but they could have had someone else manage all that for them. I guess that is also why they are moving this route now instead of trying to sue people. That was too much work too. | |
| 
Chuckles
Premium
join:2006-03-04
Saint Paul, MN
| Bad idea. Try to catch the pirates or take the loss. Raise your prices to compensate for loss if necessary. If people stop buying CDs because of price increase. Drop it. Isn't this basic business knowledge?
Piracy tax. How rediculous. How about bulk foods tax at grocery stores for the people who sample. Drinking fountain tax for the people who take too big of a sip. Penny jar tax for the people who never leave a penny. Criminal tax because people rob, cheat and steal. LOL Piracy Tax.
--
kustomerservice.net | |
| 
MemphisPCGuy
Senior Systems Engineer
Premium
join:2004-05-09
Memphis, TN
·Comcast
| Why make it a "tax"? Just sell license's like QUAKE Why bother making it a tax? Just sell "licenses" for 5$ a month. I think the point here is they are looking at millions of users online x $5 = $$$$.
Also, is it just me... or did they not not mention 'uploading' music ? Will the uploading of music still be "illegal" but the receiving of not? Isn't that what we have already, without the 5$?
BT software could include a place to inut your unique license that verified itself everytime you went online, like multiplayer software. It always seemed to work for Quake ... why not the RIAA.
--
»www.memphispcguy.com | |
| | | | 
Geezer
@oxi.net
| Who cares? I hope this marks the panicked death throes of the giant record labels and the RIAA. Hopefully the world will soon wake up to the fact that no-one needs these giants any more.
Since you can arguably record and produce music in your bedroom, of a quality as good as high profile commercial releases, and then release it on the net, then what is the point of a record label?
As a possible side benefit, all the half-arsed, cheap, highly commercial pop shite might die out since there won't be any cynical executives pushing this stuff through; we'll be back to the age of small musicians making music because they want to, not megastars churning out the same old shit album after album because it makes them shed loads of cash. | |
|
StarfishEarth
@cox.net
| already paying tax! another tax?? perhaps none of you recall that a tax was implemented years ago on every spindle of blank CD's that you buy. Its built into the retail cost,and goes to support the recording industry. CD burners have the same tax built into them. haven't you ever wondered why blanks never get dirt dirt cheap?? The RIAA never mentions it because they want you to forget about it,so they can do future maneuvering such as this new tax.
I'm already unhappy simply because I don't record music on my blank cd's/dvd's, I use them exclusively for data storage. yet I too pay the tax.
The purpose of this tax was to make up for the lost income they would suffer since people would be able to copy music at home.
Since this tax already exists, I fail to see how the RIAA or MPAA gets away with suing anyone.
It was a deal the RIAA struck with the US government back in the 1988-1990 time frame.
word | |
| | | |
|
Rescrewing the consumer again or nothing for something
I guess it is time to re-screw the consumer again. The first screwing by the music industry was when the Compact Disc was introduced. There was such a demand for Compact Discs by consumers trying to replace their record collections, that the Record/CD dealers added a $4.00 dealer premium on CDs. By 1984 the performers sued the record labels to force compensation based on the actual sale price of the CD rather than the MSRP. The record companies maximum price was to be $12.98 for CDs. That price quickly ballooned to $16.98. The next screwing was the fee levied on music quality cassettes and CD ROMS licensed to record music on CD Recorders. I was annoyed because I paid the fee for music quality cassettes even if I did not use the cassette for recording copyrighted music. The way the record labels want screw the broadband customers again, is to ask them to shell out another Five to Ten Dollars per month even if they do not they copy music from P2P downloads. Better if the consumer were able to purchase a USB Dongle to access their accounts and then pay a monthly fee for unlimited downloads without copy protection. The dongle would act as a way to tie the customer to their account.
·