Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Unlikely, heading for "infowars" type paranoia First, artists have plenty of ways to bypass the old distribution model. YouTube, for example, launched Justin Bieber's career. He ended up signing with a manager but that was his choice.
Plenty of artists distribute directly on iTunes. If you Google the phrase itunes direct music distribution, you'll see a zillion links with howtos about hooking up your music directly to iTunes and selling it there.
The band Collective Soul, who sold millions of albums in the 90s on Atlantic Records, broke their deal and went indie about 5 years ago.
These are just examples. It's a myth that the old entertainment industry forces artists into signing with them. There are plenty of other outlets. Why should the media companies care about some crappy shady MegaBox thing that might or might not happen when Apple is sitting there eating their lunch today?
Second, realize that MegaUpload was kind of a shady operation. They had their pirate side and their legit side. The legit side was used to cover up the pirate side, where they made all their millions. They pretended to be responsive to DMCA requests but in fact were encouraging and paying for uploads of copyrighted material behind the scenes. This will all become extremely clear as the case against them unfolds, and I'm sure people here will not see reality, but we'll try to make the facts available.
Given that, why would you assume that there was some vast conspiracy where multiple countries were manipulated by the evil puppet master media companies into doing their bidding, and their REAL goal was to kill MegaBox? When there's so much evidence that in fact there was massive piracy going on with millions of dollars being paid? That is just Alex Jones infowar type thinking. "Ah hah! I KNOW the REAL reason for (insert your favorite conspiracy theme)! Despite all public evidence to the contrary! WAKE UP PEOPLE!" I'm not buying it. |
|
 coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC
 ·Windstream
| I'm not buying the media companies loss figures either. Perhaps this will turn out to be a good thing in that the courts will be able to shed a light on the real damages as the trial progresses so we can get a more accurate feel for piracy losses world-wide.
I am not holding my breath, but I do have a very large bowl of popcorn ready 
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Bickering about how much was lost is pretty much a detail in the big picture. Of course the media companies will put it high and the defendants will put it low. It's not credible to come in with a defense that says "you really lost nothing". That doesn't pass the smell test. It's some number, what it is exactly isn't that important, because the copyright law says nothing about the value of what was copied without permission, much less cite it as a mitigating factor. |
|
coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC Reviews:
·Windstream
| said by MyDogHsFleas:Bickering about how much was lost is pretty much a detail in the big picture. Of course the media companies will put it high and the defendants will put it low. It's not credible to come in with a defense that says "you really lost nothing". That doesn't pass the smell test. It's some number, what it is exactly isn't that important, because the copyright law says nothing about the value of what was copied without permission, much less cite it as a mitigating factor.
Not that I disagree with that analysis as far a guilt is concerned, there is still the nagging question of what the real figures are. Knowing that can help the industry to adjust and concentrate their efforts towards finding ways to monetize that sub-culture without taking a ban hammer to the Internet willy-nilly.
At the very least, accurate loss figures will also help the general public come to grips with the reality and actual, rather than unsubstantiated, harms the industry is facing...
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by coldmoon:said by MyDogHsFleas:Bickering about how much was lost is pretty much a detail in the big picture. Of course the media companies will put it high and the defendants will put it low. It's not credible to come in with a defense that says "you really lost nothing". That doesn't pass the smell test. It's some number, what it is exactly isn't that important, because the copyright law says nothing about the value of what was copied without permission, much less cite it as a mitigating factor.
Not that I disagree with that analysis as far a guilt is concerned, there is still the nagging question of what the real figures are. Knowing that can help the industry to adjust and concentrate their efforts towards finding ways to monetize that sub-culture without taking a ban hammer to the Internet willy-nilly. Agree, sort of. The smart ones are not saying "ooh look we're really not losing THAT MUCH from piracy, so let's do xxx". They're saying, "Ohh look at piracy, it represents a new way to market and sell. Let's treat it as an opportunity." In other words it's not coming from "how much am I losing" it's coming from a strategic vision of new markets and products.
At the very least, accurate loss figures will also help the general public come to grips with the reality and actual, rather than unsubstantiated, harms the industry is facing...
Second, even if you COULD get "accurate figures", what is the point of releasing them to the public? So the public could say, "Hey look those companies are only losing $200 million instead of $400 million! So let's repeal DMCA and kill SOPA!" Not gonna happen. |
|
a1_AndyPremium
join:2005-12-29
Oshawa, ON Reviews:
 ·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
You keep saying itunes,
Itunes in appliance based a apple product is nothing but a appliance.
the difference is with MegaBox everyone would be able to cross platform the products gained from there service.
Itune's is useless to anyone who' does't like apple's appliances.
--
A piece of crap in a box with a guaranteed sticker on it is nothing but a guaranteed piece of crap.
You Can build a man a fire and he will be warm for a night, You can set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC Reviews:
·Windstream
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Admittedly there are going to be areas where absolute accuracy is going to fail such as those who pirate because they can rather than those who pirate because they are left outside the market at the current price breaks, regional restrictions, and use of DRM. Without going into the deep technical end of the algorithm pool, getting a better handle on the unrepentant pirate sector could conceivably be a good thing as it would help to narrow LE efforts on that sector rather than trying to dragnet the entire Internet with all the chaos and confusion that creates.
What I would suggest, if it were at all possible, is to have an independent economic analysis done for the entire industry with real data from all industry players without subterfuge or evasion. Though this is more likely pie in the sky stuff; especially where proprietary data is concerned, it is still worth a discussion that may (hopefully) lead to a situation where the industry is forced to put up or shut up.
It is one thing to say wolves in general are a bane to farmers and quite another to say those 10 wolves over there are the problem. You end up with totally different solutions to the real problem - wolves hunting and killing livestock everywhere as opposed to this happening at farmer Jones' property...
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to MyDogHsFleas
Disagree. |
|
| Ummm... with what? |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to coldmoon
said by coldmoon:What I would suggest, if it were at all possible, is to have an independent economic analysis done for the entire industry with real data from all industry players without subterfuge or evasion. Though this is more likely pie in the sky stuff; especially where proprietary data is concerned, it is still worth a discussion that may (hopefully) lead to a situation where the industry is forced to put up or shut up.
This to me is a weird suggestion. you say "to have an analysis"... ok who exactly would do that? and who's going to pay for it? and why should companies give up their proprietary competition sensitive information to allow this to be done? and what exactly would be the goal of this analysis? You say to "force the industry to put up or shut up"... huh? put up WHAT? the industry is not on trial here AFAIK. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to a1_Andy
said by a1_Andy:You keep saying itunes,
Itunes in appliance based a apple product is nothing but a appliance.
the difference is with MegaBox everyone would be able to cross platform the products gained from there service.
Itune's is useless to anyone who' does't like apple's appliances.
Well, sure. I'm not suggesting by any means that Apple is the only one out there. Google/Android has alternatives, and there are certainly others. I highlight Apple first because in my view they were the prime movers in this market and very much are the big elephant in the room. The TV content providers are very afraid of what Apple is going to do for (or to) them, analogous to what Apple did for/to the music providers.
I will quibble with you about how you characterize the Apple offerings. First it's about both iTunes and iCloud, not just iTunes. Second it's not at all an "appliance". iTunes is cross platform across Windows and Mac. iTunes generally stores music in standard MP3 files, which are compatible with any player. iCloud has a Web browser interface so can be used from anywhere. Google things like "sync iTunes to Android" and you'll see it's a very active area. |
|
coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC Reviews:
·Windstream
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas:said by coldmoon:What I would suggest, if it were at all possible, is to have an independent economic analysis done for the entire industry with real data from all industry players without subterfuge or evasion. Though this is more likely pie in the sky stuff; especially where proprietary data is concerned, it is still worth a discussion that may (hopefully) lead to a situation where the industry is forced to put up or shut up.
This to me is a weird suggestion. you say "to have an analysis"... ok who exactly would do that? and who's going to pay for it? and why should companies give up their proprietary competition sensitive information to allow this to be done? and what exactly would be the goal of this analysis? You say to "force the industry to put up or shut up"... huh? put up WHAT? the industry is not on trial here AFAIK. Actually the industry is on trial with the public; especially following the SOPA/PIPA debacles, abuse of the DMCA, corrupt levels of campaign contributions, and an industry lobby group threatening the Congress because they failed to stay "bought" in the face of overwhelming public outcry.
If the industry wants to really, and I mean really, stop on-line piracy, then they are going to have to justify the laws and tools they are seeking with real data or it is just another instance of crying wolf when they fail to understand and adapt to new technology (printing presses, copy machines, VCRs, DVRs, cosset tapes, etc, etc, etc.)
Decisions need to be based on hard fact backed up by solid evidence - the time for "this is real because I say it's real" are over. That is what is meant as put up or shut up.
As for who might take on the study? Look no further than the top flight economics universities, the large number of students looking to bite into a topic with current relevance across a number of different sectors, and then combine that with a blind fund, provided collectively by the industry AND government and you have a winning formula for getting some unbiased output from the data.
Now why should they do this? From a purely strategic perspective, of course the industry would balk at such a thing as it could conceivably torpedo their efforts. But until such is actually done, I have no faith in anything the industry says. Now, take you poison as I am not the only one with this opinion and the time to baffle them with b******t rather than dazzling with facts is at an end...
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| I think you're living in a bubble. Find me any legit (i.e. statistically valid, samples population correctly) poll where SOPA/PIPA or Internet Privacy or Copyright Regulation even registers as an issue above a very small percentage, much less "the industry being on trial with the public". You can't. Find any politician running for national office who's made this a big issue in their campaign. OK Ron Paul maybe. Fringe guy.
So, no, it's not going to happen. The industry is not on trial. No one is going to put together a blue ribbon commission like it was the Kennedy Assassination or something to investigate the crap out of this. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | reply to MyDogHsFleas
said by MyDogHsFleas:Bickering about how much was lost is pretty much a detail in the big picture. Of course the media companies will put it high and the defendants will put it low. It's not credible to come in with a defense that says "you really lost nothing". That doesn't pass the smell test. It's some number, what it is exactly isn't that important, because the copyright law says nothing about the value of what was copied without permission, much less cite it as a mitigating factor.
The industry has been screaming 'loss' for so long that people believe it to be true. If they tell you enough times that it smells, you will say 'Yeah, I guess I smell it.'
The concept of 'loss' is fairly easy to understand... one second you have something, the next you don't. Generally speaking, it happens without your control. If there is a better definition of loss, I will be happy to discuss it.
From this starting point, we can see that the industry's claim of billions of dollars lost has no merit. Their bank accounts didn't go down immediately after each act of piracy. As an example, if you were expecting a Christmas bonus but your company cheaped out, would you consider that a 'loss'? Would you call the police and report it stolen? Of course not, such a claim would be ridiculous. Likewise, the industry cannot claim EVEN A SINGLE DOLLAR as a loss due to piracy on their tax returns without going to jail. The issue is not quantification but qualification.
There is also no loss of their content, they still have legal ownership of it just as they do when they sell the right to use it commercially.
A careful and detailed examination will show that the only thing that can be claimed as a 'loss' is desired revenue. Unfortunately, many things can cause a loss of desired revenue:
- Competition
- Misreading public demand
- Poor business practices
- A RECESSION
Ultimately, there is no difference in this 'loss' if someone doesn't buy a CD because he/she borrowed it from a friend and didn't like it or if he/she doesn't buy it because they 'found' it. There seems to be a perceived difference that one way there is loss because the person enjoys the music but the other way there is no loss because they don't enjoy it. In reality there is no such difference... there is no real 'loss'. |
|
