swiftymc
join:2004-02-15
Mansfield Center, CT | please explain please explain how there was a loss...every single report ive ever seen or heard about music sales says they are up...every sales report except ones from the RIAA.
How do the justify a loss...is it just because their projected sales didnt add up to the actual sales? What about if someone just didnt wanna buy the album?
The way they attempt to justify it is highly bias towards making it seem like every person who didnt buy it...downloaded it for free. If there really were such losses, there would be less artists putting out work and less record deals being made.
Give me a god damn break... |
|
1 edit | if they didnt wanna buy the album they shouldnt have the album. do you know how many artists out there are going broke because of copyright infringement?
--
noogoo vs. the copyright law -
»noogoo.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
swiftymc
join:2004-02-15
Mansfield Center, CT | said by noogoo:if they didnt wanna buy the album they shouldnt have the album. do you know how many artists out there are going broke because of copyright infringement? You misunderstood my post, what I said was that the RIAA ASSUMES that everyone that didnt buy it...downloaded it. Which isnt true at all. Its just an excuse to make their campaign look more important then it is. P2P didnt even blow up until they started fighting it...its been around forever and timing for the RIAA to go after it makes no sense. P2P use is only higher then it was when the RIAA started fighting it...and album sales are up!!
Example: Eminem's Encore album sold 4+ million
50 Cent's Massacre has also sold ~4 million copies
(Keep in mind these are just examples, both of these guys are ridicuously rich) Their albums new and old have been exchanged all over the net and they still sell millions of copies...give me a break if you think the industry is goin bad. |
|
2 edits | it would be nice if there was a law that limits how much you can make off of your copyright.
if the copyright law is there to compensate the copyright holder and their next of kin, a couple of million should be enough or at least if they profit the amount of minimum wage x the duration (in hours) of the copyright. time is money right?
now if there was a limit, that would motivate the artists to make more works.
--
noogoo vs. the copyright law -
»noogoo.blogspot.com/ |
|
swiftymc
join:2004-02-15
Mansfield Center, CT | i fail to see where you were going with that |
|
| reply to swiftymc
limit compensation so we can "pirate" legally, but then it wouldn't be "pirating".
--
noogoo vs. the copyright law - »noogoo.blogspot.com/ |
|
swiftymc
join:2004-02-15
Mansfield Center, CT | I look at it like this...The music may be a persons livelyhood. At the same time, when your making atleast hundreds of thousands of dollars...in a lot of cases, millions. I dont think you have any right to complain that your missin a little money in sales. CD prices are ridiculous and not everyone can afford to buy all their new favorites no matter how much they cut back their spending. |
|
| reply to noogoo
None.If you want to refute this give me examples. |
|
| reply to noogoo
»www.bbspot.com/News/2005/07/riaa···ors.html |
|
| reply to noogoo
said by "noogoo":
if they didnt wanna buy the album they shouldnt have the album. do you know how many artists out there are going broke because of copyright infringement?
Do you know how many artists are broke and/or dying (due to not having health insurance, or not being able to afford it), precisely because the record companies are greedy, corporate, cartel-mongers, and NOT due to individual acts of copyright infringement by end-users?
»www.usatoday.com/life/music/news···ts_x.htm |
|
