| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Here's one
It doesn't really talk about what the sales were of At 17 and now as far as I can tell. --------------------------------------- "I know enough to know I don't know enough" |
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
(hank alrich) writes:
They had a chance to give, say, shoutcast servers the opportunity to acquire ascap licenses just like your diner has on the jukebox, but they asked for unreasonable terms, game over. I'm not up on that but it sounds interesting. What were the terms? Were they different than for a traditional radio station broadcast in amount of money per play? From Prof. Lawrence Lessig's book "Free Culture" (http://free-culture.org): This financial burden is not slight. As Harvard law professor William Fisher estimates, if an Internet radio station distributed ad-free popular music to (on average) ten thousand listeners, twenty-four hours a day, the total artist fees that radio station would owe would be over $1 million a year.14 A regular radio station broadcasting the same content would pay no equivalent fee. ... Why? What justifies this difference? Was there any study of the economic consequences from Internet radio that would justify these differences? Was the motive to protect artists against piracy? In a rare bit of candor, one RIAA expert admitted what seemed obvious to everyone at the time. As Alex Alben, vice president for Public Policy at Real Networks, told me, The RIAA, which was representing the record labels, presented some testimony about what they thought a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller, and it was much higher. It was ten times higher than what radio stations pay to perform the same songs for the same period of time. And so the attorneys representing the webcasters asked the RIAA, . . . "How do you come up with a rate that's so much higher? Why is it worth more than radio? Because here we have hundreds of thousands of webcasters who want to pay, and that should establish the market rate, and if you set the rate so high, you're going to drive the small webcasters out of business. . . ." And the RIAA experts said, "Well, we don't really model this as an industry with thousands of webcasters, *we think it should be an industry with, you know, five or seven big players who can pay a high rate and it's a stable, predictable market.*" (Emphasis added.) Translation: The aim is to use the law to eliminate competition, so that this platform of potentially immense competition, which would cause the diversity and range of content available to explode, would not cause pain to the dinosaurs of old. There is no one, on either the right or the left, who should endorse this use of the law. And yet there is practically no one, on either the right or the left, who is doing anything effective to prevent it. ----- 14. This example was derived from fees set by the original Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP) proceedings, and is drawn from an example offered by Professor William Fisher. Conference Proceedings, iLaw (Stanford), 3 July 2003, on file with author. Professors Fisher and Zittrain submitted testimony in the CARP proceeding that was ultimately rejected. See Jonathan Zittrain, Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings and Ephemeral Recordings, Docket No. 2000-9, CARP DTRA 1 and 2, available at link #45. For an excellent analysis making a similar point, see Randal C. Copyright as Entry Policy: The Case of Digital Antitrust Bulletin (Summer/Fall 2002): This was not confusion, these are just old-fashioned entry barriers. Analog radio stations are protected from digital entrants, reducing entry in radio and diversity. Yes, this is done in the name of getting royalties to copyright holders, but, absent the play of powerful interests, that could have been done in a media-neutral way. 461: Distribution, Picker, |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Paul Rubin wrote:
"Ricky W. Hunt" writes: A radio listener with a tape deck can do the same thing. I think he means in radio you can only tape what they play. Meaning if they don't play the songs you want your screwed. Whereas with Kazaa everything is available to you. True and valid. However, at least back in the day, you could call a radio station and ask them to play a particular song, and they would play it. Downloading is a little different than listening to the radio. Imagine a radio where every station is an individual song. And every time you tune in that station, they start playing that song. Makes copying that song a lot easier... The Internet is a distribution system, not a broadcast system. This is why record labels are resorting to tactics like suing 12 year olds. Its a little ironic that after so many years of crying wolf over cassettes and then CDs, something came along that could really wipe them out and they didn't even notice until Napster demonstrated what people like Todd Rundgren had been trying to tell them for years. henry salvia |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
... However, at least back in the day, you could call a radio station and ask them to play a particular song, and they would play it. You're showing your age! LOL You haven't been able to that for years. And even before that (at least where I live) they just took requests out of courtesy (but never actually played what you requested). Since most people were probably requesting stuff that was in rotation on the playlist already they were never the wiser. Anybody remember dedications? When's the last time you actually heard that done? (Not counting Casey Kasem's thing). |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Henry Salvia" wrote in message
... Its a little ironic that after so many years of crying wolf over cassettes and then CDs, something came along that could really wipe them out and they didn't even notice until Napster demonstrated what people like Todd Rundgren had been trying to tell them for years. The industry does seem to be extremely out of touch with both technology and their customer's needs and understanding of what the customer is willing to pay for (if they would just give us an easily-accessible, decently-priced option). I'm sure all of this is great news for the indie artist though. |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
ryanm wrote:
snip . People are using P2P software to shop for the music they will buy next. True for me. How else would I get to hear it ? Uk radio programming is so biased that it's virtually useless. Also allows you to 'trial' older works - or just be plain adventurous about stuff that might interest you but you'll never find played anywhere. Just amazes me that record companies haven't twigged that it's the new 'high street window'. Graham |
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
And even before that (at least where I live) they just took requests out of
courtesy (but never actually played what you requested). In radio today phones are VERY important and that's one reason they don't back announce. They want to get 5 phones calls saying "wow what was that?" --------------------------------------- "I know enough to know I don't know enough" |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Pooh Bear wrote:
ryanm wrote: snip . People are using P2P software to shop for the music they will buy next. True for me. How else would I get to hear it ? Uk radio programming is so biased that it's virtually useless. Curious, can you get XM satelite radio there? I've had it about a month now and it's everything I had ever hoped FM could be (not enough classical though.) I was so out of touch with what is current (other than my ability to hear stuff at Border's listening stations) that a lot of the mentions here went right over my head. That is changing now. I have the USB controled PC version and there is an ability to click and save a reference to whatever you are hearing and later put the artist or group in your "favorites" list. Subsequently, any time that artist is on any of the 100 channels you get notification and the opportunity to tune in. That is really refining my preferences. Their blues station, yeah just one, is awesome. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
Paul Rubin wrote: Bob Cain writes: Not that this makes any difference but before I ran Kazaa I had about 10 CD's. Now I have over 300 all purchased at retail. Since I stopped using Kazaa (about a year ago) I think I've bought about 3 CD's. I would really hope that effect is found to be widespread and counteracts the others that cease buying but I'm skeptical. Record labels whine all the time about kazaa users listening to CD tracks without paying for the CD's, but another group of people, namely radio listeners, does exactly the same thing, without the labels complaining. It's not exactly the same thing. A radio listener usually can't make up his own play lists. A Kazaa user can. Downloading arguably competes more directly with CDs than radio does. But the moralistic argument that some people use does seem to apply to radio, at least in the U.S. (because radio stations do not need to obtain permission to play, nor do they pay a fee for the recording). Sam |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Druhms" wrote in message
... It is common knowledge among music industry types that downloading is hurting This is a great statement because it sounds important without actually saying anything at all. Whose sales have been hurt? Several studies released recently show the only declines among the least popular top 40 artists, and everyone else actually *gaining* sales due to downloading. In Australia, ARIA is having a record year for sales, despite their very loud prognostication that the bottom was about to drop out of the industry over there due to sharing. All of the big labels are freaking out right now. They do this every time anything new happens. Remember "Home taping is killing the music industry", or are you old enough to remember that? The plan now is how to tap into it instead of fight it. No, it isn't. The plan is to kill it any way they can. It is absolutely the *last* thing the majors want, because it takes away from them the control over distribution, essentially reducing them to a bank that lends money to artists under unconsionable terms. No one would want a deal if they didn't control distribution, they would just hire a good manager, call their band a business, and take out a small business loan to pay for recording or touring or whatever. ryanm |
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"EggHd" wrote in message
... but since the advent of P2P downloading, some artists' back catalog purchases have gone up significantly. Who? Did you even read the other thread? I posted links to articles, one of which names several artists and indy labels. There are more, but I don't know why I should bother to look them up if you won't even read what I've already posted. ryanm |
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Bob Cain wrote:
Pooh Bear wrote: ryanm wrote: snip . People are using P2P software to shop for the music they will buy next. True for me. How else would I get to hear it ? Uk radio programming is so biased that it's virtually useless. Curious, can you get XM satelite radio there? Not that I'm aware of. Of course you can use Real Networks stuff to get many online stations but I hate the way their software acts like a virus ! I've had it about a month now and it's everything I had ever hoped FM could be (not enough classical though.) I was so out of touch with what is current (other than my ability to hear stuff at Border's listening stations) that a lot of the mentions here went right over my head. That is changing now. Sounds like good news. I have the USB controled PC version and there is an ability to click and save a reference to whatever you are hearing and later put the artist or group in your "favorites" list. Subsequently, any time that artist is on any of the 100 channels you get notification and the opportunity to tune in. That is really refining my preferences. Their blues station, yeah just one, is awesome. Ahhh - you sound a bit like a man after my own heart - but I like a lot of new(ew) stuff too ! I have *no idea* what kind of consumer category a record label would place me in. Totally untypical I guess ? Actually - on the subject of Real Networks - I had to upgrade to view something and got invited to a trial of Rhapsody - their online music service. It was in fact pretty good ! $9.99 pcm for unlimited listening to anything in their catalogue - and they do good cross-indexing too - so you'll get interesting suggestions that are well worth listening to. $0.99 for a 'CD quality' download - which would be fine I guess if it translated according to 'wire rates' to 55 pence ( £0.55 ) but (a) the service isn't actually available in the UK and (b) I expect most US companies think that £0.99 is the same. So, after my trial period that I managed to 'frig' I was cut off - and - oh well there you go....... Why do record companies see the net as a problem instead of seeing it as the amazing shop front that it is ? Graham |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Did you even read the other thread? I posted links to articles, one of
which names several artists and indy labels. There are 30K titles released a year and you are talking about seevral artists and indie labels that have seen sales go up. neato. There are more, but I don't know why I should bother to look them up if you won't even read what I've already posted. I am broken hearted. --------------------------------------- "I know enough to know I don't know enough" |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1080841276k@trad... Yeah, but he has to do more work than drag-and-drop, and most of today's music collectors won't put up with real time recording, fast-wind-and-search, the pause button, and most of all, not having a source list generated automatically. So it's about how difficult it is? I thought it was all "steeEEEEEeeeling!!!!" Why does how difficult or easy it is matter if it's a fundamental crime against humanity that deserves a prison sentence? ryanm |
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Ricky W. Hunt" wrote in message
news:i%%ac.156884$Cb.1613095@attbi_s51... I think he means in radio you can only tape what they play. Meaning if they don't play the songs you want your screwed. Whereas with Kazaa everything is available to you. And that's bad? ryanm |
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
... From Prof. Lawrence Lessig's book "Free Culture" (http://free-culture.org): Thanks, good link. ryanm |
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Mikey" wrote in message
om... Yes it is, and you won't go into it because you are both morally and legally wrong. No, it's not. Read the statutes, please, we've been through this a thousand times on this very group. If you think that's true, go to a doctor, dentist, or barber shop, use their services and walk out without paying. See what happens. It's called theft of services. Theft of services is not a crime listed in the statutes. It is a nice little phrase invented by the cable companies to address illegal tapping of cable feeds. It is not the same thing, it is not defined as theft, and it is not even called "theft of services". Again, read the actual law, it covers this quite clearly. I realize the sales decline is/was not only a d/l problem. But someone's desire to do an end-run around the labels does NOT require abandoning moral, fair-to-the-artists-wishes approaches to the situation. Please return to reality. I notice you haven't replied to the part of my last post saying that the decision to offer for download should be the artist's, not yours or some freeloader's. Or do you feel that the artist should not have that right? Since when has the distribution method been up to the artist? Name one artist on a major label who has a say in the distribution of their music. Name one artist who gets to decide which radios stations they want their music played on. These are decisions made by the label, not the artist, so they would have to *have* a right in order for it to be taken away from them. ryanm |
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
In article ,
hank alrich wrote: ryanm wrote: So it's about how difficult it is? I thought it was all "steeEEEEEeeeling!!!!" Why does how difficult or easy it is matter if it's a fundamental crime against humanity that deserves a prison sentence? I don't think anybody said it was cool to dupe tapes; but I think even you could understand the implications of the of giving away via P2P that which is not yours to give away. I regard the potential for an independent artist to use the p2p networks as an open distribution medium as being of far more consequence than any other consideration. To me it's not about "what's not yours to give away", it's about a communication medium not being suppressed by the state or by a state interest driven by influence of a corporation. If my neighbor kills his wife with a steak knife (maybe she burned the Ziti?), does that mean I should accept it when the state police go door to door confiscating everyone's steak knives? Okay bad analogy. There are other problems. First one being, pandora already opened her damned box. There's a lot of wishful thinking going on among those who'd like to close it. I'll bet my canoli to your donut that you could spend the entire federal budget trying to suppress "open file trading" and fail. I believe that what "They" (and some of "US", considering the nature of this newsgroup!) want, is impossible to deliver. And I absolutely believe that any successful suppression of the whole P2P thing is going to seriously abridge certain fundamental rights. Even to the extent that I agree there could be some damage done by the combination of copyable media and easy, cheap, effective distribution methods, I will not accept the abridgement of my own rights as an artist or as a citizen, as collatteral damage. If there is a fundamental crime against humanity deserving of a prison sentence, I'd like to submit abrogation of the means of mass communication to be placed on the list immediately below intentionally ending the life of a human being. Incidental copyright infringement is not even *on* that list, get it? |
|
#61
|
|||
|
|||
|
RealVirus (was: Study shows downloading helps cd sales)
Pooh Bear wrote:
Of course you can use Real Networks stuff to get many online stations but I hate the way their software acts like a virus ! Switch to Linux and try Helix https://helixcommunity.org/ |
|
#62
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
... Of course you can use Real Networks stuff to get many online stations but I hate the way their software acts like a virus ! Yeah, avoid that crap like the plague. There was an interesting article where some ex-employees were interviewed about their aggressive practices, I'll have to find it. Ahhh - you sound a bit like a man after my own heart - but I like a lot of new(ew) stuff too ! I have *no idea* what kind of consumer category a record label would place me in. Totally untypical I guess ? Yeah, see, the problem is that you *are* the typical listener. They've known this for decades, but there isn't anywhere near as much money in releasing every little niche band that people want to hear. The *real* money is in releasing a single artist that they can sell to everyone. Unfortunately, the only way they can get everyone to buy that one disc is to keep everyone from ever hearing all of those little niche artists that they might like better. See, 1000 artists selling 1000 copies is a million sales, but they have to pay for production and advertising 1000 times. Meanwhile, if they can have 1 artist sell a million copies of the same album, then they only have to pay for the production and advertising once, which means the profits are an order of magnitude higher. An interesting book which has absolutely nothing to do with music or P2P downloading is called _The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual_ by Chris Locke. You can find it, in its entirety, online he http://www.peak.org/~luomat/misc/clu.../foreword.html It's really a book abvout marketing, and it's several years old by now, but the reason it's important is because it discusses the revelation that there is *no such thing* as a mass market: the mass market was invented by companies who wanted to sell the same product to lots of people. It talks about how the internet has made it very easy for companies to cater to all of the niche markets out there, and it's a good thing too because the consumer can also use the internet to become more informed and find competing products if your company *doesn't* cater to them. It talks about the importance of aggregagtion, personalization, and most importantly, choice. A site like Amazon is the perfect example, because it encompasses all of those. Amazon offers *lots* of products at reasonable prices, but that's not what makes it great. The really great thing is that each customer can offer a review for each product. So the products that look great on paper but actually break when you get them home, you can now read the customer reviews and find out *before* you purchase. They also act as an aggregator by giving you the "Other people who purchased this product also purchased..." feature. It allows them to push personalized content at you without having to ask you a bunch of invasive quastions about how much money you make and what size underwear you wear. What it basically does is everything the record labels *don't* want you to be able to do with music: try before you buy, hear what other people thought about it, publicly deride them for charging too much or offering an inferior product, and find all of the little niche artists that you would never be able to find under the old model. I recommend the book if you have the time, but it *is* a book about marketing so it may actually put you into a coma from boredom. His (Chris Locke's) story is really pretty good. He made a ridiculous amount of money trying everything he could think of to get fired from some really big companies, everything from insulting customers and vendors to insulting CEOs and VPs, but all they would do is give him a promotion, because sales kept going up no matter how hard he tried th screw it up. Fun story. Why do record companies see the net as a problem instead of seeing it as the amazing shop front that it is ? One word: control. ryanm |
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#64
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"hank alrich" wrote in message
... I don't think anybody said it was cool to dupe tapes; but I think even you could understand the implications of the of giving away via P2P that which is not yours to give away. I think if I looked I could probably find you condoning it in one of these threads, at least as an alternative to downloading. But that's not the point, the point is, it's simply not that big of a deal. It is less of a crime than littering, literally. And that's how it should stay. I mean, yeah, you *could* go to prison for littering, but you'd have to be a real dumbass. Likewise, just downloading a few songs (or even uploading 1000) doesn't deserve a prison sentence. I understand the implications, and I can live with them. I say this as a copyright holder and person who makes at least part of his income selling independently created IP (even though it's software instead of music). ryanm |
|
#65
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
In article ,
ryanm wrote: I think if I looked I could probably find you condoning it in one of these threads, at least as an alternative to downloading. But that's not the point, the point is, it's simply not that big of a deal. It is less of a crime than littering, literally. Have you heard some of the crap that passes for music these days? Playing it at audible levels *is* littering. Pollution, even! It'll all work out in the end. 9 out of 10 kids that have cars today, are going to be completely deaf from their 160dB car "stereos". |
|
#66
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Paul Rubin wrote:
(hank alrich) writes: I don't think anybody said it was cool to dupe tapes; but I think even you could understand the implications of the of giving away via P2P that which is not yours to give away. Congress and the RIAA have said it's cool to dupe tapes (Audio Home Recording Act). For personal use, not to mimic P2P as if done by centipedes. g -- ha |
|
#67
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
ryanm wrote:
I think if I looked I could probably find you condoning it in one of these threads, at least as an alternative to downloading. Let's see it then. You think plenty of things. -- ha |
|
#68
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"Scott Dorsey" wrote
Well, it would sure be nice if performers could make a living actually going out on the road and performing. But THAT has turned into a rotten market too, with a few groups making huge money and the middle-range dropped totally out. I hear people blaming this on everything from bars banning smoking to the increase in drinking age to the lack of music appreciation classes in schools. Also due to musicianship standards dropping because of sequencers and loops and autotune etc. etc. |
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"james" wrote
But really, the goal isn't to get money out of P2P. The goal is to squash it. See, for an independent artist like a singer/songwriter, selling the one recording isn't the goal. The *exposure* is worth *far* more. And there's never been a medium that can provide the kind of exposure that the p2p networks gives naturally. If your stuff is good, it'll get out there because of it's merits, not because of the picture on the jewel case, not because of it's position on an endcap in the department store, and not because some paid salesman suggested that you buy it. People will listen to your stuff because they like it. If They can never stop an independant artist from offering a free download of his own song. All you need is a site which links to and rates them and you have a very good distribution model for indies. Sony will never be able to sqaush that. Anthony Gosnell |
|
#71
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
"ryanm" wrote in message
... "Pooh Bear" wrote in message ... Why do record companies see the net as a problem instead of seeing it as the amazing shop front that it is ? One word: control. Which is strangely valued more than profit. That's why the record companies are always the last ones to figure how to make money from something new. Sean |
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
ryanm wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1080841276k@trad... Yeah, but he has to do more work than drag-and-drop, and most of today's music collectors won't put up with real time recording, fast-wind-and-search, the pause button, and most of all, not having a source list generated automatically. So it's about how difficult it is? I thought it was all "steeEEEEEeeeling!!!!" Why does how difficult or easy it is matter if it's a fundamental crime against humanity that deserves a prison sentence? It's all stealing. The point is that making it easier for people to steal things is a bad idea. People who are determined will steal things no matter what precautions you take, but the majority of people who steal things do so just because it's easy and they don't think they'll get caught. Putting a lock on your front door doesn't do anything to prevent a determined thief from getting in, but it will keep random kids from walking in and perhaps taking a souvenir. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#73
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#77
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
|
|
#79
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
wrote in message ...
Contrary to popular urban myths, downloading doesn't account but for a tiny minorty in drop in cd sales. In fact research shows that cd downloading increases are followed by greater sales for the same cd. It is not unlike radio playtime, the more it is heard, either by download or on the radio, the more likely for a purchase. The music biz needs to wake up and smell the shrink wrap on recordable cdr's. It is a loss in quality of music stupid and manipulation of talent in an attempt to create the next "big" act that is at fault. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994831 This is just common sense. CD sales are back up, by the way -- just like the economy. I wonder if the two are related. Naaah, too obvious. The whole copyright thing has come up before, of course. Thomas Babbington MacAulay laid it out pretty nicely in a speech before the British House of Commons back in 1841. His conclusion reads, in part: "Just as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by piratical booksellers. At present the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. Those who invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Everybody is well pleased to see them restrained by the law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. No tradesman of good repute will have anything to do with such disgraceful transactions. Pass this law: and that feeling is at an end. Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly. Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit; and the whole nation will be in the plot. On which side indeed should the public sympathy be when the question is whether some book as popular as Robinson Crusoe, or the Pilgrim's Progress, shall be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great-grandson of a bookseller who, a hundred years before, drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the author when in great distress? Remember too that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop. The public seldom makes nice distinctions. The wholesome copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace and danger of the new copyright which you are about to create. And you will find that, in attempting to impose unreasonable restraints on the reprinting of the works of the dead, you have, to a great extent, annulled those restraints which now prevent men from pillaging and defrauding the living." The concept is pretty simple: the passage of contemptible laws leads to public contempt of all the laws. Anyone who cares about this issue should read the full text of his speeches. http://www.baen.com/library/palaver4.htm -DrBoom |
|
#80
|
|||
|
|||
|
Study shows downloading helps cd sales
Considering the portion that
actually goes to the creators of the music and the retailers, $20 CDs are just outrageously priced. 1. Please show where people are buying $20 Cds anymore. 2. Please explain where the money goes from a $20 CD. If you post this kind of thing, please back it up. --------------------------------------- "I know enough to know I don't know enough" |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Where are those Wascally Weapons of Mass Destwuction??? | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
