dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
582
share rss forum feed

bored_in_nh

join:2003-01-04
Stamping Ground, KY

1 recommendation

something I never understood

So the record and movie companies say they are losing money from pirated material. How? If someone downloads something without paying for it, isn't that usually because they want that item and don't have the resources to be able to afford it? So if they can't afford it, they won't buy it. Does that count as losing money too? What's the difference between losing money because someone couldn't afford it and downloaded it, and someone who didn't download it or buy it either? OMG I don't listen to hip hop. Those record producers are losing money on me!

What if a friend of one of these pirates listens to the music or sees the movie the pirate has downloaded, and then decides they want to buy it? Hasn't this turned into a profit for the record company or movie prodcer?
--
In 2000, CEO pay was statistically 300:1 to minimum wage. In 2005, it's 431:1. If minimum wage matched growth rate with CEO pay from 1990 to 2005, it would now be $19.00/hr.

Is Ann Coulter a transexual? What's with that adams apple?


swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia

1 recommendation

Your reasoning is right on target. They talk about billions in "losses" to piracy, but if they listed amounts on their balance sheets as debits incurred because of non-purchase of their products when potential customers decided against buying, the SEC would put them in jail. Such hypotheticals do not comport with "generally accepted accounting principles".


hehe

@ssa.gov

1 recommendation

reply to bored_in_nh
said by bored_in_nh:

So the record and movie companies say they are losing money from pirated material. How? If someone downloads something without paying for it, isn't that usually because they want that item and don't have the resources to be able to afford it? So if they can't afford it, they won't buy it. Does that count as losing money too? What's the difference between losing money because someone couldn't afford it and downloaded it, and someone who didn't download it or buy it either? OMG I don't listen to hip hop. Those record producers are losing money on me!

What if a friend of one of these pirates listens to the music or sees the movie the pirate has downloaded, and then decides they want to buy it? Hasn't this turned into a profit for the record company or movie prodcer?
I agree with you. So if i decide to not pirate something this must somehow make them some money (or not lose money). I want my fair share of that money for everything I choose to not pirate.

dda
Premium
join:2003-12-29
Bolton, MA
reply to bored_in_nh
said by bored_in_nh:

If someone downloads something without paying for it, isn't that usually because they want that item and don't have the resources to be able to afford it?
No. The MPAA (or RIAA) claims that a lot of the people downloading movies and music have the resources to buy it but choose to steal it, instead. Given the people the RIAA has successfully bullied into paying them gone after have had the resources to pay the thousands demanded; that money would buy a few CDs and DVDs, I'm sure.

That said, the numbers are clearly inflated since lots of people download far more movies and music than they would, in fact, purchase. For software, the inflation is far worse since people often won't pay for a retail copy but will pirate it. But again, it's not that they don't have the resources, it is that they don't think the software is worth the asking price.

So while the MPAA (or RIAA) is inflating the numbers, they do also have a case; they are losing money to piracy, just not the billions and billions they claim.

Note that this is my opinion based on what I've seen; I don't have industry studies at hand.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

1 recommendation

said by dda:

Given the people the RIAA has successfully bullied into paying them gone after have had the resources to pay the thousands demanded; that money would buy a few CDs and DVDs, I'm sure.
Oh, Puhhlease....

Gee, you don't think the threat of total financial ruin and maybe a lifetime mountain of debt is what motivated them to scrape up the settlement money? The settlements are outrageous, but court judgements and fines appear beyond ridiculous to the extreme.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)

bored_in_nh

join:2003-01-04
Stamping Ground, KY
reply to hehe
said by hehe :

I agree with you. So if i decide to not pirate something this must somehow make them some money (or not lose money). I want my fair share of that money for everything I choose to not pirate.
Me too! I haven't downloaded anything since the L0pht ran on an old SEII with a 2GB SCSI drive. I want some reward for my good behaviour!
--
In 2000, CEO pay was statistically 300:1 to minimum wage. In 2005, it's 431:1. If minimum wage matched growth rate with CEO pay from 1990 to 2005, it would now be $19.00/hr.

Is Ann Coulter a transexual? What's with that adams apple?

dda
Premium
join:2003-12-29
Bolton, MA
reply to KrK
said by KrK:

Gee, you don't think the threat of total financial ruin and maybe a lifetime mountain of debt is what motivated them to scrape up the settlement money?
I'm sure it did motivate them but I find it very hard to believe that they had no resources and so had to pirate movies and music. The industry is losing money to piracy just not as much as they claim.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
said by dda:

I'm sure it did motivate them but I find it very hard to believe that they had no resources and so had to pirate movies and music.
Well I agree-- with some exceptions. I suspect most pirated stuff are things that people wouldn't of paid for anyway.... And I also believe that people who have copied DVD's or MP3's also still spend money buying some DVD's and Music they really like.

I strongly believe, that let's say piracy was somehow impossible, that it wouldn't lead to sudden massive sales by RIAA and MPAA members. I suspect 99% of the pirated content would simply be done without.

Teenagers are an exception.... they have a limited amount of money, but are large consumers of entertainment. I believe many teenagers copy music, games, movies etc because they really don't have the money to just buy them. Nonetheless this group still purchases large amounts of various entertainment, they just have to be selective.... and they often will pirate the rest.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
reply to KrK
said by KrK:

said by dda:

Given the people the RIAA has successfully bullied into paying them gone after have had the resources to pay the thousands demanded; that money would buy a few CDs and DVDs, I'm sure.
Oh, Puhhlease....

Gee, you don't think the threat of total financial ruin and maybe a lifetime mountain of debt is what motivated them to scrape up the settlement money? The settlements are outrageous, but court judgements and fines appear beyond ridiculous to the extreme.
The understatement of the year!!
"The settlements are outrageous, but court judgements and fines appear beyond ridiculous to the extreme."
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/