Going out to Wise and Clintwood to pursue people who had copies of the new Star Wars movie on their computer and let others download it via Bit Torrent.
Y'know, if the government, RIAA et al aren't able to quash "internet 2" (400 times faster than current broadband speeds) they're going to lose this fight. Actually, they've already lost it for music and the other dominoes are falling.
It might be time to develop new laws and business models you idiots. Why the heck aren't you (WB, ABC, NBC, CBS) offering your programs via Bit Torrent, Kazaa, Grokster, &cetera with a couple embedded commercials? Why aren't you (Paramount, 20th Century Fox, TriStar) releasing trailers, 20 minute sections of the film, and old films with ads imbedded? The music industry has already adjusted to file sharing, implicitly recognizing the failure of legal coercion in the face of continued, large-scale file sharing. For example, Yahoo! Music has the price for unlimited downloads down to $4.99 a month (6.99 if you choose not to subscribe for a year). Prices in this range with assured quality make it competitive with often poor quality, possibly virus containing rips found P2P.
Pull yourself together. Adapt rather than trying to preserve your monopolies / oligopolies through regressive laws. Participate in the capitalist system rather than trying to run rough shod over it. If this tech were being embraced rather than fought off some amazing things could be taking place.
rant triggered by post from ComCon
1 comment:
Great comment. Let me tell you why I agree with you. I was a DJ for many years before starting law school last year. A few years ago, about 3 days before a wedding, a bride called me to change her wedding song. I did not have it. None of the record stores I called had it. To get it on time, by ordering online, I would have had to pay for the CD and overnight shipping a total of $34.00, all for one song. Or, I could just go on Napster and have it in less than 2 minutes. Guess what I chose? And I got it for free. If the record label would have sold it to me online for $3.99, or $4.99, or even $5.99, I would have paid for it.
It is their fault they lost so much money. And, like the music labels, networks are missing the boat big time.
Post a Comment