how-to block ads
|
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| reply to thender2
Re: Who Cares now, really?
said by thender2  :said by chemaupr :I agree. If I spent money developing tv programs(no matter how bad it is) and someone else without a license post it on a site and make money out of adds and banners linked to my program, I should be fairly compensated. After all, they are making money out of my efforts, their efforts none! Anyone who follows my news posts can see that I am always on the side of so called "piracy" It's one thing to share HDTV shows. It's another to make hundreds of thousands of dollars off of other people's shows. Call people who share files whatever you want - but they're not making money off of other people's work. They're sharing it because they want other people to see it, and maybe even buy it, because they have respect for the work. Youtube making money off of someone else's work is legitimately wrong. I guess you call your position morality?  | |
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
2 edits | a)
b) No, I don't call it morality.
I just don't find it fair.
Torrent sites direct people to material, and make little-no money(usually the latter). They don't actually hold any of the content, and they are always taken down.
Yet a site that makes a boatload of money, off of actually _hosting_ the content(not pointing people to it, but being the source of it), receives no ill will.
I think the playing field should be more fair. Either youtube receives more crap, or torrent sites receive less.
For the record, I don't use torrent sites - they're too much of a pain in the ass, they were just trhe best example I could think of at the moment.
said by EnasYorl
[/bquote :People sharing files that someone spent allot of money creating. Instead of paying for it. Are EXACTLY the same as someone who walks into a store and shoplifts. . Several courts say it(filesharing, not for-sale-piracy) is not, but thanks for playing.
quote:
And the theft not only affects the company your stealing from but the Parents/People who work there. Smaller bonuses, smaller benefits, all trickles down too the little guy in the end.
Your arguement is that it is against the law. If it is against the law, you shouldn't have to amend to your arguement. Once you begin arguing aftereffects, then you open the gate for me to.
Every record label you talk to will agree with the statement that 80% of what they try to promote flops due to bad promotion.
What better promotion is there than the internet? You'd think the fact that sales went up 11% in music the year napster became popular, and 5% the next, would be proof enough of that statement.
--
The Problem With Music.
Our Rationale
Time to rewrite the DMCA. | |
|
