how-to block ads
|
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
 ·VOIPo
| reply to ---
Re: That ought to last about two weeks...
said by ---:
With exceptions of course - playing a radio station in a business in order to create atmosphere obligates the business to pay royalties.
Which is nothing but bullsh*t logic. Everyone involved with music already makes enough money-- why must they charge businesses to play for consumers what would otherwise be freely available in their cars? Shame, shame, shame...
And they wonder why people don't feel the least bit sorry for them when they falsely inflate their "losses" to online "piracy". (in quotes for a big reason there...)
Yeah, I know that this has been the case for quite some time, but it still shouldn't make it any more acceptable. If someone buys a CD, they should have the right to play it under whatever circumstances they choose. If someone buys a radio, they should have the right to turn it on under any circumstances they choose. And both of these examples should include businesses and the like, no matter how many customers happen to be standing around. Greedy, greedy, greedy.
--
Cox cable: the hallmark questionable business practices and lousy cable service! | |
TheHelpful1
Premium
join:2002-01-11
Upper Marlboro, MD
| said by NOVA_Guy  :
said by ---:
Everyone involved with music already makes enough money
Actually, not everyone involved with music makes enough money. The actual artist make pennies on the dollar for the music they write/sing/perform.
An exaggerated point is that for the $1-million an artist' CD will make, the Recording industry ass. of America takes over $900K out of it and leaves the remaining $100K to be divided among the actual artist, promotional expenses, and every other "little person" who helped make that CD.
And should "piracy" start to eat away at the profits, the Industry just takes those "lost sales" out of the $100K and not their own $900K.
Like that commercial for the MPAA with Ben affleck that says "dont pirate, it hurts the little people". Well if the studios didnt pay the actors such outrageous wages for just learning a script that another harder worker spent time writing, it might not be so bad. Sean connery made only $100K for his first movie "Dr. No" in 1962, but in 2003 he was paid $17-million for League of Extrordinary Gentlemen. Now that is some serious "cost of living" increase...
--
"Not that you would, but you could" | |
SuperJudge
Magus
Premium
join:2002-11-14
Albany, GA
clubs:
| said by TheHelpful1 :
said by NOVA_Guy :
said by ---:
Everyone involved with music already makes enough money
Actually, not everyone involved with music makes enough money. The actual artist make pennies on the dollar for the music they write/sing/perform.
An exaggerated point is that for the $1-million an artist' CD will make, the Recording industry ass. of America takes over $900K out of it and leaves the remaining $100K to be divided among the actual artist, promotional expenses, and every other "little person" who helped make that CD.
And should "piracy" start to eat away at the profits, the Industry just takes those "lost sales" out of the $100K and not their own $900K.
Like that commercial for the MPAA with Ben affleck that says "dont pirate, it hurts the little people". Well if the studios didnt pay the actors such outrageous wages for just learning a script that another harder worker spent time writing, it might not be so bad. Sean connery made only $100K for his first movie "Dr. No" in 1962, but in 2003 he was paid $17-million for League of Extrordinary Gentlemen. Now that is some serious "cost of living" increase...
There needs to be a new entity to replace the RIAA, that's all so unfair to the artists and crews who do all the work. Administration makes 9/10's of the profits, and that's just plain lame.
--
MediaXPeer | |
|
