|
 BigVe
join:2005-07-15
Gulliver, MI | Re: Hmm Maybe it would be better to have a higher price tag like $10+ as long as the money goes to the artists and not the pockets of RIAA & MPAA etc. | |
|
 | 
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
 ·Sprint Broadband D..
| Re: Hmm Trust me when I tell you that the artists will see some of this money right about the same time a formation of pigs takes to the air down the street in front of my apartment.
I worked 27 years in the music biz and I know that in formulating this genius idea, the thought of the artist's compensation rarely or never crossed their minds.
The lawyers are just interested in their billable hours, the executives their compensation and stock prices and the music biz dweebs, getting their expense account budgets back up to what they once were.
Note: There is very little facetiousness in this post. | |
|
| 
Corehhi
join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
| said by BigVe  :Maybe it would be better to have a higher price tag like $10+ as long as the money goes to the artists and not the pockets of RIAA & MPAA etc. Doesn't matter to a lot of artists since they don't receive any money after a certian time period. This is all about the record companies. That said I don't think this is such a bad idea.
It would kill Itunes I would think.
Hmmmm, got to be some horrible catch somewhere. ???? | |
|
| | severach
join:2002-09-12
Jackson, MI | Re: Hmm Sure there's a catch. Who wants to be the first to sign up?
Me: "Hello, I'd like to add the Piracy Plan to my service."
Cable: "Let's see, your address is... OK, wait right there. Someone will be with you in a moment." | |
|
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | What they are really trying to do is sell an insurance policy against being sued by the **AAs. If the $10/mo allowed me to down load any music or any tv show I would consider paying for it. | |
|
d25m03p
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Langley, BC
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| said by netwire :I'm not sure about this. On one hand, sure for $5 to $10/mo unlimited downloading and sharing does not seem bad. But on the other hand, so many people would opt in for this that connections would become even more bogged down and the networks overloaded. Bad, bad, bad! Once it starts, it will never stop. Today $5. Tomorrow, OOOPS, [CEO] my pension plans needs a fill up by $200M. Inflate the "voluntary" $5 by 200%.
Then of course, there are the other players that will now feel left out;
1. The electronic games people.
2. The software people (like Microsoft and SCO - they want their license fees even though you are using Linux!)
3. The movie industry
4. The porn industry
5. The telco's (you are using VoIP, aren't you?)
6. The NSA, CIA, FBI, MI5/6, XYZ police (you are using VPN, aren't you?)
7. The government revenue bottom feeders (fees for collecting the collections of "taxes")
8. The newspapers
9. The book and magazine publishers
10. The electricity industry
Where will it end once the gate has been opened for the muckraking music industry?
No thanks. I won't be paying any tax to any damn music or movie industry. The idea is BAD, BAD, BAD! I puke whenever I read news about so called voluntary taxes, because like all taxes, it doesn't remain voluntary - it becomes compulsory. | |
|
| jdjbuffalo
join:2004-01-17
Denver, CO
| Re: Hmm ^
|
This. It opens Pandora's box if we allow it to proceed. Your $50* internet bill will look like this.
*Taxes not included in this price.
15/2 Internet Package...$50.00
Local Taxes.................$2.00
State Taxes................$3.00
Music Tax....................$7.00
Games Tax...................$12.00
Movie Tax....................$15.00
Porn Tax.....................$5.00
Microsoft Tax...............$10.00
Other Software Tax.......$20.00
Total: $124.00
(Note all numbers are made up but realistic given this scenario) | |
|
| | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Re: Hmm Plus per-byte billing, and the assorted regulatory recovery fees... | |
|
|
|
|
·
·