The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Why Game Software Publishers Don’t Fear Piracy = why the music biz fails. Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 6th September 2011
  #91
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Not saying piracy hasn't had it's effect!!! Just saying - the reasons the music industry is SO fekked (and I mean the sales apart because the rest of it is pretty healthy)
probably not as healthy as you think...
I guess touring isn't going to save music . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
is because it's had more to deal with than just piracy. It grew as disposable income grew - and now disposable income gets spread further.....
same old, same old... in the three decades prior to the turn of the century disposable income and competing products were also in effect, but it wasn't until rampant unchecked online piracy that recorded music sales dropped... IE, sales dropped when the product could be had for free without consequence on an unprecedented size and scale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
John made some excellent points about previous about previous competitors of music - but things were cheap "back in the day" The cinema these days is more than pocket money yet STILL people go. Or buy DVDs or etc etc and muchos muchos.....
again, same old, same old... VCRs when introduced were not cheap, neither were VHS tapes or movie rentals, let alone cinema charges. Same for DVD players and DVDs... things were not "cheaper back in the day"... that's just not true. If anything, they were MORE expensive on a ratio of income as new technologies always cost more during the introduction phases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Heck - even my internet ISP costs!!
was it free 10 years ago? I've been paying ISP charges since before there was an internet! back in the day we paid a BBS to get access to USENET via a dial in line on a modem after midnight when phone rates were cheaper...

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
As for custom car, John , I didn't mean hot rods etc - but a lot of kids spend their money on all manner of "car goods" in the UK.
I grew up in Jersey, drag racing in Philly... that was the 80s... again, nothing new there... so far the only thing new is Piracy, which is the X-Factor...

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Here's the thing though: as a business owner making turnover from music (which is what I is!!) one has to look beyond the common perception. I look at the dollar going into other areas and have found various ways of bringing those dollars back into my business. I haven't fought piracy, I didn't instigate any protective outlay on our software products as the economics don't work. I DID get some of the inflight ents budgets from cheap flights, I DID invest in PA hire to car festivals (like the various VW fests in the UK), I AM investing in musical releases that are disinterested in digital media (market music to 50 year old women for example!!) which is bringing enough of a return on the two artists involved to create waves and therefore land them more syncs.....
and you are describing workarounds to piracy... that's why you are targeting 50 year old women, they don't pirate music... you're also describing pretty much what everyone one who is doing music professionally is doing... scrambling to compensate for the lost income due to declining record sales, as the result of piracy. I'm doing much the same, but I know WHY I'm doing it... I'm not waiting for the laws to change, I'm doing what I can now... but I also know that if the laws were to change and we get better enforcement, there will be massive windfalls for everyone left in the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
You have to THINK in this biz. If you wanna make money selling music? Think about using the value of music to make money instead (the distinction is subtle)...... I've always hated piracy, and I've ranted on here for years an years about how to fight it and its effects..... then I looked at, and understood, the bigger picture.
There is no bigger picture, there's only the hustle to make the best of it as it stands right now. I'm about to enter into a massive partnership with a huge toy company to create branded audio products for cross merchandising... in the TOY isles... not a business I thought I'd be in, but this is where it's going... Brands are going to be labels... bet on it...

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music...d-funding.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
The graph above is very illuminating - it's one I've been aware of a long time. It shows, quite rightly, the biggest sales were at the end of the 90s. However - the biggest MARGINS are over ten year earlier.
I don't know about that, I was there for both. No one was crying over margins in the 90s because the overall volume made up for it. More money is more money. Maybe the margins got a little smaller, but the overall volume got a lot bigger...

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Label margins went DOWN with growth in sales towards the end of the 90s. The point? The point is the issue is never a simple as single data sets. It's a complex issue with myriad problems and outcomes.....
It's not that complicated.

When the product you are trying to sell can be had for free, illegally and without consequence, and as easy as a google search, that is going to take a big bite out of the bottom line.
Old 6th September 2011
  #92
Which only confirms my view that the more a type of music is pirated, the more that type is neglected.
I wont be making music aimed at 50 year old women.
If that demographic want to buy it, fine.
Old 6th September 2011
  #93
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
God, cars - it used to be that a major pastime for a large number of young American males* was hotrodding and customizing their cars. They used to spend phenomenal amounts of money on this. Nowadays it's illegal in most places to do most of those alterations yourself - you have to pay through the nose to a licensed builder if you want a real hot rod - and guys content themselves with playing automotive video games for a fraction of the cost.

Which is why only guys like Jay Leno can afford real hotrods anymore.......
actually, the car scene is a good analogue to what's happening in the music scene. the UK is still pretty liberal as to what you can do to a car (mine doesn't have any cat converters, runs on two-stroke premix, is about 100dB on idle and would never pass a legit emissions/smog test. it costs me an absolute fortune to maintain, let alone a tank of petrol here is around $160!).

anyway, what this means is that we're flooded with fake aftermarket parts. garages and parts suppliers are going bust left and right simply because nobody is going to buy a £1,500 genuine Garrett turbo when they can buy the cheap chinese version for £150. it's gotten to the point now where 'legit' retailers are selling knock-off parts just to be competitive!

imagine walking into a big record store and they're selling pirated albums with ink-jet liner notes on burnt CD-Rs, that's pretty much what's happened to the aftermarket car scene and, i guess, maybe where music is headed if things get out of hand.
Old 6th September 2011
  #94
Quote:
Originally Posted by sajuz View Post
Nevermind my ugly english Its my 3rd language.

There's only 2 ultimate solutions:

1. Advertising. Nothing to be earnt here. Cause the market for ads, placed around music, is very limited.

2. Taxation.
You have to get money from:

- Buyers of playing devices by imposing a tax on every sold playing device.
or
- People in general by imposing a "mediacontent-tax" on every household. Actually this is the way germany funds its public television and radio system. Taxes are also the way drama theater or classical music is fundet, though not directly (cities subsidize every sold ticket, sound engineers working in operas ore public TV-stations are "civil servants")
No. Been tried, won't work.

There is, however, one solution which has been proven to be EXTREMELY effective over several millennia of use.

LAW ENFORCEMENT.

Sorry if you don't like it.
Old 6th September 2011
  #95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
The Supreme Court do. Did you bother to read their honours' opinions in the referenced case, or are yours somehow superior?
Don, the referenced case has nothing to do with the question at hand - it concerns manufacturing and interstate transport of physical product, based on recordings that were never released commercially. It's a totally different question.

Did YOU actually bother to read it?
Old 6th September 2011
  #96
Narcoman, I play honky-tonk outlaw country, Texas blues, and the occasional Yardbirds style psychedelic rave-up.

Mind explaining how I market that to 50 year-old women?

I'm not frakkin' Kenny G. I wouldn't WANT to be Kenny G. Or Steely Dan, for that matter.

As a business mook you can say "I'm going to target 50 year old women because they don't pirate", but that pretty well leaves me and all the other musicians that find that sort of thing disgusting out in the cold, doesn't it?

It's not a solution. It doesn't help anybody but you and your company and the tasteless (or desperate) musicians who are willing to play the garbage you sell.

It doesn't help the music industry get healthy. It doesn't bring back funding for innovative, or even interesting, artists. If anything it contributes to the problem "The industry doesn't put out anything I want to buy, so why should I pay for music?"

You say you're making money from music. But you're not supporting artists making the music they want to play, you're only supporting hacks who are willing to play to your formula.

Maybe good for you, not good for me.

Not helpful.
Old 6th September 2011
  #97
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Narcoman, I play honky-tonk outlaw country, Texas blues, and the occasional Yardbirds style psychedelic rave-up.

Mind explaining how I market that to 50 year-old women?

I'm not frakkin' Kenny G. I wouldn't WANT to be Kenny G. Or Steely Dan, for that matter.

As a business mook you can say "I'm going to target 50 year old women because they don't pirate", but that pretty well leaves me and all the other musicians that find that sort of thing disgusting out in the cold, doesn't it?

It's not a solution. It doesn't help anybody but you and your company and the tasteless (or desperate) musicians who are willing to play the garbage you sell.

It doesn't help the music industry get healthy. It doesn't bring back funding for innovative, or even interesting, artists. If anything it contributes to the problem "The industry doesn't put out anything I want to buy, so why should I pay for music?"

You say you're making money from music. But you're not supporting artists making the music they want to play, you're only supporting hacks who are willing to play to your formula.

Maybe good for you, not good for me.

Not helpful.
wow John. Is there really any need for such inappropriate hostility or rudeness?

garbage I'm selling?
contributes to the problem?
tasteless?
doesn't help anybody but me?

and you find what I do disgusting? (despite running a proper blues and stoner rock label - you don't really GET much more roots than that)


Is that REALLY how you communicate with people? I'm assuming you don't do it in person.......


You're looking for sinister motives where there are none ( I split GROSS 50/50 with artists on my label)..... You're quite a "character" John but I have little time for rudeness.

as an aside - if you do play any of those styles of music with convincing ability then I can TOTALLY see how those over 30 would go for it. Oh - and I don't "market to 50 year old women" (it certainly wouldn't be Kenny fu.cking G!!) - it was an example of how ignored over 30s are in mainstream music......
Old 6th September 2011
  #98
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
... If there were sites that sprung up and had a dozen downloaders then dissapeared, maybe your argument would make sense. But that's not what we're talking about, is it?
No, we're not. All I did was to point out an incorrect blanket statement that's popular with "strong pro copyright enforcement" proponents - that "copyright infringement is theft". While I don't disagree with this as a moral argument, I have not seen anyone (including Terry Hart) actually point to legislation or case law that supports a blanket "copyright infringement is theft". The US Supreme Court, on the other hand, said that it isn't, and went on to describe in some detail the difference. John and others disagreed, I then chose John's arguments as representative for rebuttal, and here we are.
Old 6th September 2011
  #99
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Don, the referenced case has nothing to do with the question at hand - it concerns manufacturing and interstate transport of physical product, based on recordings that were never released commercially. It's a totally different question.

Did YOU actually bother to read it?
Yes, I did. Carefully. You, on the other hand, appear to have not carefully read my earlier reply to you, where I said:

" ... The point is not the case itself, it's that the judges also went into considerable detail on the general topics of what is considered to be copyright infringement and how bad it has to be before it can can be prosecuted under Federal law. "

After disposing of the actual case, they went on to discuss copyright infringement and copyright law in general.
Old 6th September 2011
  #100
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post

It's not a solution. It doesn't help anybody but you and your company and the tasteless (or desperate) musicians who are willing to play the garbage you sell.
heh

total 100% subjective opinion targeted to generate an emotional response...

as many that agree with you will disagree with you, and those that do will find what you do tasteless and garbage... luckily i like all MUSIC so you won't get any negative lashings from me, i would probably like your stuff a lot, too bad you don't make it available here...

anyways, good luck man, i've always appreciated your intensity so i truly hope you find your solution...

Old 7th September 2011
  #101
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
wow John. Is there really any need for such inappropriate hostility or rudeness?

garbage I'm selling?
contributes to the problem?
tasteless?
doesn't help anybody but me?

and you find what I do disgusting? (despite running a proper blues and stoner rock label - you don't really GET much more roots than that)


Is that REALLY how you communicate with people? I'm assuming you don't do it in person.......


You're looking for sinister motives where there are none ( I split GROSS 50/50 with artists on my label)..... You're quite a "character" John but I have little time for rudeness.

as an aside - if you do play any of those styles of music with convincing ability then I can TOTALLY see how those over 30 would go for it. Oh - and I don't "market to 50 year old women" (it certainly wouldn't be Kenny fu.cking G!!) - it was an example of how ignored over 30s are in mainstream music......
Sorry, didn't really mean it that way - I guess I'm a bit cranky when I wake up in the morning sometimes - especially when my teeth hurt.

That "50 year old women" bit kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Your words, not mine. And I'm sick and tired of hearing about selling t-shirts and coffee mugs. Perhaps I took things a bit out of context.

Actually I'm looking to market to an audience that crosses all age demographics; a lot of kids are pretty fed up with what the present marketing geniuses with the major labels are trying to sell them. The problem, at least in this country, is getting anyone with any clout to actually go out on a limb.

"Blues and stoner rock label" sounds interesting.......

Maybe we can talk about specifics outside the piracy forum - I'd be interested in seeing what you think.
Old 7th September 2011
  #102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Id Ridden View Post
heh

total 100% subjective opinion targeted to generate an emotional response...

as many that agree with you will disagree with you, and those that do will find what you do tasteless and garbage... luckily i like all MUSIC so you won't get any negative lashings from me, i would probably like your stuff a lot, too bad you don't make it available here...

anyways, good luck man, i've always appreciated your intensity so i truly hope you find your solution...

Yeah, I woke up extra grouchy this morning, sorry about that.

As far as making my music available here, I don't see any reason to give away what I hope to sell as a commercial product. I've given rough mixes of a couple of songs to selected people under terms of an NDA.
Old 7th September 2011
  #103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
No, we're not. All I did was to point out an incorrect blanket statement that's popular with "strong pro copyright enforcement" proponents - that "copyright infringement is theft". While I don't disagree with this as a moral argument, I have not seen anyone (including Terry Hart) actually point to legislation or case law that supports a blanket "copyright infringement is theft". The US Supreme Court, on the other hand, said that it isn't, and went on to describe in some detail the difference. John and others disagreed, I then chose John's arguments as representative for rebuttal, and here we are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
Yes, I did. Carefully. You, on the other hand, appear to have not carefully read my earlier reply to you, where I said:

" ... The point is not the case itself, it's that the judges also went into considerable detail on the general topics of what is considered to be copyright infringement and how bad it has to be before it can can be prosecuted under Federal law. "

After disposing of the actual case, they went on to discuss copyright infringement and copyright law in general.

Either infringement is theft or it isn't. It can't be theft sometimes and not theft others. Under US law (and most other countries with legal systems based in English Common Law, infringement is a form of theft. The precedents go back to the 17th century.

What the court was discussing was when the egregiousness of the crime reaches a point where the law takes notice of it. What they're saying is in essence "Don't bug us about the neighborhood kids raiding your watermelon patch!" They're not saying it isn't stealing, they're saying it's not worth their time.

Which has been the whole problem with the federal attitude toward music piracy in a nutshell, until the initiatives of the current administration.

The other point you're totally ignoring is that the case cited was in 1985, long before the concept of internet music piracy ever existed, and as such has no bearing on the problem at hand.
Old 7th September 2011
  #104
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
It also doesn't suffer from "widespread" piracy. It suffers from SOME piracy - same as music used to do before the internet. The difficulty in getting most console games to work from downloads precludes piracy from being a major factor - it IS still significant but it certainly is not "download and play"..... Even the mechanism of copying a game in the first place makes piracy something that is done by tech savvy buccaneers (ho ho !!) rather than any Joe with a computer CD device.
if you think the VG industry only suffers from some piracy go have a look at how many people are on a popular torrent!

and unfortunetly it is download and play . Once you have chipped your WII or flashed your xbox dvd you download an iso and burn it to disc . simple as burning a cd of mp3s.

and the modification of the console is not tech savvy , you take it to a shop , pay and walk out.

everyone mentions pc piracy , but yet steam is pc focused the point of the article is that they don't think piracy is a problem.

and there are a lot of people buying games on steam!
Old 7th September 2011
  #105
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Either infringement is theft or it isn't. It can't be theft sometimes and not theft others. ... The other point you're totally ignoring is that the case cited was in 1985, long before the concept of internet music piracy ever existed, and as such has no bearing on the problem at hand.
Point 1: It can be either infringement or theft.

Point 2: Maybe I've been asleep since 1985 and the law has changed... Nope, it hasn't. I didn't ignore the point, it was simply irrelevant.
Old 7th September 2011
  #106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
Point 1: It can be either infringement or theft.
No. Infringement IS theft.

Quote:
Point 2: Maybe I've been asleep since 1985 and the law has changed... Nope, it hasn't. I didn't ignore the point, it was simply irrelevant.
The law doesn't change, generally speaking, although it did a bit with the DMCA.

What changes is the way the court interprets and applies the law and that changes with the composition of the court.
Old 7th September 2011
  #107
I honestly think the 'theft' argument has been done to death and is also waaaaay off topic.
The problem for creative people is that ordinary people do not understand 'infringement'. For example, if you infringe on someone's personal space it's seen as an annoyance, not something that stops a musician from paying their mortgage or continuing to work.

So if you take someone's work by downloading their ep without paying for it, it feels much more like theft than infringement.
Old 7th September 2011
  #108
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
No, we're not. All I did was to point out an incorrect blanket statement that's popular with "strong pro copyright enforcement" proponents - that "copyright infringement is theft". While I don't disagree with this as a moral argument, I have not seen anyone (including Terry Hart) actually point to legislation or case law that supports a blanket "copyright infringement is theft". The US Supreme Court, on the other hand, said that it isn't, and went on to describe in some detail the difference. John and others disagreed, I then chose John's arguments as representative for rebuttal, and here we are.
Copyright infringment IS theft. And you just said so (and then contradicted yourself)

You're right that there's different "levels" of infringment (if that's what you meant) with different mandatory punishments. Some warrant civil action, while others are criminal. It's ALL Federal law and criminal copyright infringment IS a felony.

§ 506. Criminal offenses
Old 7th September 2011
  #109
time for a refresher...



and...

Old 7th September 2011
  #110
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Sorry, didn't really mean it that way - I guess I'm a bit cranky when I wake up in the morning sometimes - especially when my teeth hurt.

That "50 year old women" bit kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Your words, not mine. And I'm sick and tired of hearing about selling t-shirts and coffee mugs. Perhaps I took things a bit out of context.

Actually I'm looking to market to an audience that crosses all age demographics; a lot of kids are pretty fed up with what the present marketing geniuses with the major labels are trying to sell them. The problem, at least in this country, is getting anyone with any clout to actually go out on a limb.

"Blues and stoner rock label" sounds interesting.......

Maybe we can talk about specifics outside the piracy forum - I'd be interested in seeing what you think.
no worries big man!!
Old 7th September 2011
  #111
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
if you think the VG industry only suffers from some piracy go have a look at how many people are on a popular torrent!

and unfortunetly it is download and play . Once you have chipped your WII or flashed your xbox dvd you download an iso and burn it to disc . simple as burning a cd of mp3s.

and the modification of the console is not tech savvy , you take it to a shop , pay and walk out.

everyone mentions pc piracy , but yet steam is pc focused the point of the article is that they don't think piracy is a problem.

and there are a lot of people buying games on steam!
exactly - "once you've chipped" etc .... the majority of music downloads are piracy related. The majority of games downloads are sales. More and more games require extra content - and THAT's when they get you!!

I KNOW it doesn't suffer from piracy as much as music!!
Old 7th September 2011
  #112
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
time for a refresher...



and...

heh
Old 9th September 2011
  #113
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
No. Been tried, won't work.

There is, however, one solution which has been proven to be EXTREMELY effective over several millennia of use.

LAW ENFORCEMENT.

Sorry if you don't like it.
except you never had the internet back then.

rack gear says piracy is the x factor

perhaps the internet is really the x factor

I can watch all the music I want for free , for ever , any time , any place legitimately and never break a single law and completely destroy the music industry in the process......
Old 9th September 2011
  #114
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
except you never had the internet back then.

rack gear says piracy is the x factor

perhaps the internet is really the x factor

I can watch all the music I want for free , for ever , any time , any place legitimately and never break a single law and completely destroy the music industry in the process......
Actually, no, you can't.

That's absolute bull.

I just got back from the pub, I'll deal with your nonsense in the morning.

And why would you want to destroy the industry that produces the music you listen to?

Are you crazy?
Old 9th September 2011
  #115
Eat
Lives for gear
 

Old 9th September 2011
  #116
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Actually, no, you can't.

That's absolute bull.

I just got back from the pub, I'll deal with your nonsense in the morning.

And why would you want to destroy the industry that produces the music you listen to?

Are you crazy?
I THINK he meant (or at least I hope he meant) that by not doing the illegal stuff he wouldn't be destroying the industry. Depends how you bracket his sentence!!
Old 9th September 2011
  #117
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvsky View Post
except you never had the internet back then.

rack gear says piracy is the x factor

perhaps the internet is really the x factor
You are wrong on this. Theft is theft. Rampant piracy is what is killing the recorded music industry.

The internet is merely a technology that, at this time, facilitates illegal activity.

That's not inherent in the internet - it's inherent in the way that law enforcement has been failing to deal with the internet.

Tvsky, you've been around here long enough so I'm sure you've read my explanation of this before, but since you seem to have a short memory here it is again.

In the early part of the 20th century there was an epidemic of illegal activity, specifically high profile bank robbery, that was exacerbated by two new technological innovations - the submachine gun and the automobile. The automobile gave bank robbers the ability to pull a job and get over the state line to safety before law enforcement could mobilize against them, due to the fact that there were no laws against interstate flight to avoid prosecution and no federal police agency to co-ordinate pursuit and enforcement on a national level. Bank robbers like John Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, and Bonnie and Clyde thrived and became national folk heros in those days when banks were villainized for foreclosing on farmers, small businessmen, and homeowners in the Great Depression. The situation was totally out of control; there was nothing law enforcement could do to stop these new mechanized bandits under the existing legal structure. Attempts to use private security companies like The Pinkertons were only partially successful.

So they changed the legal structure. They made interstate flight a federal crime and they organized the FBI to track, arrest, or simply kill the robbers. Within a couple of years the bank robbery problem, which had been unsolvable under the old system due to the new technologies, was over.

The internet is simply today's version of the automobile. It allows thieves to steal with impunity simply because the necessary law enforcement mechanisms have not been in place to stop it. This is changing and will continue to change.

We've gone through the stage of attempting to use private means of enforcement (The RIAA, civil suits, copyright lawyers), which have not been particularly effective. Now it's time for the federal government to step in.

You can piss and moan about "infringement of your "right" to steal", blah-blah and boo-hoo. I'm sure Bonnie and Clyde and Dillinger felt the same way about the FBI taking away their "right" to flee to safety across state lines.

Good luck with that.

Five charged with criminal copyright infringement
Old 9th September 2011
  #118
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
The internet is simply today's version of the automobile. It allows thieves to steal with impunity simply because the necessary law enforcement mechanisms have not been in place to stop it. This is changing and will continue to change.
I think thats pretty bang on actually. We're still in the infancy of the digital age and, as business becomes more and more about a transfer of information rather than physical goods, laws will change to reflect what will drive politics and economics.
Old 10th September 2011
  #119
It's also a myth to suggest you can listen to free music anywhere.
There are blind spots all over each country.
So unless you listen only at home, or only travel routes you know no dropouts will occur in, you'll still need to own music and carry it on a hd of some kind.
Old 10th September 2011
  #120
Lives for gear
 
tvsky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Eppstein View Post
Actually, no, you can't.

That's absolute bull.

I just got back from the pub, I'll deal with your nonsense in the morning.

And why would you want to destroy the industry that produces the music you listen to?

Are you crazy?

I think you misunderstood.

the consumer can listen to all the music he wants for free without pirating it now , and that is whats going to destroy the industry . And its totally legal.

and that's now in 2011 , whats it going to be like in the next 5-10 years? imagine the bandwidth and connectivity that will be in place then . What hope is there if the industry deliberately gives away its product for free? Or has the industry given up any hopes of defending itself and the per view/stream pittance is as good as its going to get ?

hence the internet itself and not a single activity on it may in fact be the problem. Perhaps there is just no business model that is viable in the always on , everything connected digital future?
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump