Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Pretending DRM Works » Another BBR attempt to justify music pirating
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
416
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4
AuthorAll Replies


rds24a
Teach Your Children
Premium
join:2000-12-13
Springboro, OH
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable

reply to voyager6868
Re: Another BBR attempt to justify music pirating

There's two points of view on the whole $0.99 deal:

1. The parts cost more than the whole. Common practice...ever price out buying a car piece-by-piece from NAPA? Way more than the whole. However, It currently costs more to buy the whole online than a CD in the store.

2. The lack of distribution. No CD's, no shipping, etc. etc. There should be a price break for that, I agree. However, there is a premium on convenience and I'm not willing to argue that it should be $0.50 or $0.75 or $5.00 an album. I think $0.99 a song is OK...not great, but OK.

As for the file size/quality issue. I'm sure it's more a matter of Dances with Focus Groups trying to find some one file size that provides sufficient quality while reaching out to those lowly dialup users who still have to wait 20 minutes to download one 3 Mb song file. Perhaps the solution there is to offer a hi-fi and a not-so-hi-fi version, but I guarantee you there will be a price difference (for not much reason other than they can).
--
All hail JoePa


skipon11
Premium
join:2005-06-09
Pittsburgh, PA
reply to N3OGH
Whew! Wacoyle. They sure have Braineashed you!


Slaphappy1279

@216.135.x.x

reply to DRM is legalized the
I think it's most important to remember that, originally, copyrights were designed to keep someone from PROFITING from the use of someone else's intellectual property. The protection was designed to stop illegal use by another business entity.

Now it's about trying to control the uses of the CONSUMER. Make no mistake, ultimately these initiatives are leading up to attempts by media giants to ram through per-use types of fees. Sound ridiculous? The Phone Company (I'm talking the AT&T monopoly here) tried for years to get measured-service rates (fortunately without success). The agenda of the media-interest groups are much larger than what is being talked about in the present.


tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One

reply to rds24a
said by rds24a See Profile:

There's two points of view on the whole $0.99 deal:

1. The parts cost more than the whole. Common practice...ever price out buying a car piece-by-piece from NAPA? Way more than the whole. However, It currently costs more to buy the whole online than a CD in the store.

2. The lack of distribution. No CD's, no shipping, etc. etc. There should be a price break for that, I agree. However, there is a premium on convenience and I'm not willing to argue that it should be $0.50 or $0.75 or $5.00 an album. I think $0.99 a song is OK...not great, but OK.

As for the file size/quality issue. I'm sure it's more a matter of Dances with Focus Groups trying to find some one file size that provides sufficient quality while reaching out to those lowly dialup users who still have to wait 20 minutes to download one 3 Mb song file. Perhaps the solution there is to offer a hi-fi and a not-so-hi-fi version, but I guarantee you there will be a price difference (for not much reason other than they can).
Good points you make. You should check out the price breakdown that Wired had in a recent article. Reading that makes the cost of 75 cents a track sound more appropriate.

Full article is here:»www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.1···pic_set=

Still, I would personally rather buy whole (used) CD's rather than paying 99 cents a track. The sound quality and DRM are big issues to me, but if I find a one-hit-wonder that I simply don't want to buy the album of, I'll bite and cough up the buck. In that case I would be paying the unit cost of buying that one track as opposed to buying the whole album...but I'd still rather have the higher bitrate.
--
Copyright infringement is illegal. Murder is illegal. Therefore, file sharing is murder.


thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
reply to vinnie97
None of those sites had Dream Theater. Easily available off usenet, IRC, P2P, and local CD stores.

I'm right on the mark.. online buy services are complete trash.
Forums » Pretending DRM Works
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4


Wednesday, 25-Nov 13:09:37 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [104] New AT&T Ad Campaign Hits Back At Verizon
· [93] Apple Joins AT&T Verizon Snark Fest
· [85] New Bill Takes Aim At Higher Verizon ETFs
· [41] In-Flight Internet Headed For Bumpy Landing?
· [38] TiVo Sees Record Customer Losses
· [38] Time Warner Cable Fires Broadside At Broadcasters
· [32] Senators Want ACTA Made Public
· [30] Earthlink Suffers From Major E-mail Outage
· [30] AT&T Offers New Prepaid Wireless plans
· [28] Frontier Increases Modem Rental Fee
Most people now reading
· [Rant] Damn Sermons through my speakers! [Rants, Raves, and Praise]
· Climate Change Scandal Erupts After Email Hack. [Security]
· Mysterious $800 Cash Deposit? [General Questions]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· [Rant] The Weather Channel [Rants, Raves, and Praise]
· christmas music already, Christ! [Rants, Raves, and Praise]
· 1333mW AP?! Everything we know says it shouldnt exist.... [Wireless Service Providers]
· [ PvE] Items that will just not drop in your raid [World of Warcraft]