yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| reply to RadioDoc
Re: WRONG
said by RadioDoc  :The greed of the RIAA-member companies is legendary. You can't make that go away by using sleazy debating tactics. Steve 's argument is that their greed isn't a valid reason to engage in piracy. It's an entirely moot point and he's completely right.
Show me the part in the rule books where wrongs should be counter-acted upon by an equal wrong.
--
This signiture pisses you off. |
|
deblin
Dark Side of the Moon
Premium,MVM
join:2001-09-01
Middletown, DE
| said by yock : Steve 's argument is that their greed isn't a valid reason to engage in piracy. Couldn't agree more.
--
$(perl -e 'print pack("H*","6d616e207065726c0a")') |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc :You are not a mod anymore either (gee I wonder why?) I resigned; shall we speculate about you?The greed of the RIAA-member companies is legendary. You can't make that go away by using sleazy debating tactics. I don't believe I ever tried to. Holding the thread up to a strong light, we see that I called them thugs and hoped that their entire business model would go away. I am not sure that qualifies me as any kind of RIAA fanboy.
But they are not the only greedy ones. Those who are trying to bring about better business models are doing good work, but there is a large contingent of those who are not taking this principled approach, and just take everything they can get without any consideration for artists and won't ever pay anybody.
RIAA's greed at least has a fig leaf of moral cover, in that they are acting as agents for valid copyright owners. Those who steal in wholesale have no such principled cover.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to yock
I know what Steve 's point is. My point is that he crapped the thread again pushing it where it doesn't belong.
said by Original post:
Itunes _ONLY_ purpose for apple is a promotional tool for ipods. Apple (as well as the artists) make hardly anything (a couple cents) off of each download because of the greedy record companies. said by Steve 's ad hominem response:As opposed to the greedy users, who think nothing of stealing every bit of music they can find? This is about iTunes alleged success. Nowhere is there anything about "piracy".
--
Attitudes are contagious. Mine might kill you. |
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
| said by Complete original post; emphasis added:
Enron also LOOKED like it was doing well.
Itunes _ONLY_ purpose for apple is a promotional tool for ipods. Apple (as well as the artists) make hardly anything (a couple cents) off of each download because of the greedy record companies.
Steve's post looks quite apropos when you look at the entire thing.
--
This signiture pisses you off. |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to RadioDoc
Oh yah? |
said by RadioDoc :This is about iTunes alleged success. Nowhere is there anything about "piracy".
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
deblin
Dark Side of the Moon
Premium,MVM
join:2001-09-01
Middletown, DE
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc :This is about iTunes alleged success. Nowhere is there anything about "piracy". And the OP's statements didn't insinuate people aren't still stealing music via iTunes? I'd call that piracy.
--
$(perl -e 'print pack("H*","6d616e207065726c0a")') |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Steve
said by Steve :said by RadioDoc :You are not a mod anymore either (gee I wonder why?) I resigned; shall we speculate about you? No need to speculate. I stood up to the bullshit that made people like you a mod and called a spade a spade. I refused to compromise my beliefs. They fired me for it. You resigned because you couldn't take the heat.The greed of the RIAA-member companies is legendary. You can't make that go away by using sleazy debating tactics. I don't believe I ever tried to. Holding the thread up to a strong light, we see that I called them thugs and hoped that their entire business model would go away. I am not sure that qualifies me as any kind of RIAA fanboy. But they are not the only greedy ones. Those who are trying to bring about better business models are doing good work, but there is a large contingent of those who are not taking this principled approach, and just take everything they can get without any consideration for artists and won't ever pay anybody. RIAA's greed at least has a fig leaf of moral cover, in that they are acting as agents for valid copyright owners. Those who steal in wholesale have no such principled cover. Steve
--
Attitudes are contagious. Mine might kill you. |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc :Nowhere is there anything about "piracy". Well, other than the News topic that is.
Forums » News articles » iTunes Vs. Piracy » WRONG
It's also the first word of the first post in this thread.
C'mon
--
$ /bin/whoami
nobody |
|
BeesTea
Network Janitor
Premium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000 | reply to RadioDoc
I don't sing for anyone, just as you say, calling "a spade a spade".
--
$ /bin/whoami
nobody |
|
N Yazdi
join:2004-04-19
Omaha, NE | reply to AbBaZaBbA
itunes is a very nifty program when you play around with it, i was a mmjb/wmp/winamp user but now use itunes almost exclusively |
|
jsouth
Jsouth
join:2000-12-12
Wichita, KS | reply to Drex_CS
Actually that is the RIAA in this case, but who's counting. Thier both crooked.
--
BTK is Caught!!!! |
|
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| reply to RadioDoc
You're getting way out of line. Take the personal insults and attacks on a private message. That goes for all of you. Now about this topic. iTunes is a success because it draws in a lot of business. Doesn't matter if P2P numbers are higher. The RIAA said a song download business model wouldn't fly, yet here it is. It's still flying in spite of Apple hardly making any money.
Drex_CS's original post was off the mark to begin with. Doesn't matter if the claims from iTunes is correct or not. At this point they certainly are the most popular paid download service there is. On the business end that's what counts. You all should be happy about this. That means the RIAA was wrong about the business model and don't have nearly as much leverage in fighting file trading. It means people are buying music instead of getting it for free, thus further diminishing the RIAA's claims. It means artists are getting some money for their efforts (at least in pianotech's case). It's a win-win situation no matter what side of the fence you are on.
|
|
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| reply to redhatnation
I wouldn't refer to the service as mediocre. I think it is a solid service. I think this distracts from the main point.
I would like to explain, though, why I think it is a bad idea to participate in these services.
I understand your argument that you do not feel the terms are restricting you presently. That is valid, but the fact remains that those terms are not legal obligations on their part. They can change those terms whenever they choose and, because you are tied down to a drm system, they can enforce those changes with simple software alterations. With cd sales, if the industry tried to force retroactive changes in what was considered acceptable use, of what you had previously purchased, they had, as a practical matter, no power to enforce such changes on you. DRM acts as a lock in. Once you are in it your use of what you have purchased is under their control and you have no way to get out, without giving up use of everything you bought.
You actually have LESS freedom then you did under cd distribution where their ability to dictate terms as to how you used what you purchased was limited by practical realities. This is the reality of drm in the internet age. It is actually creating a world where the buyer has LESS freedom and power than they did with the old distribution models.
Why should we allow the industry to construct new models that give them even greater control than they had before? This turns the openness and freedom of the internet on its head.
This is why drm is so insidious. It places ALL the power in their hands and it allows them to change all the terms at any time, for any reason they choose. People don't seem to notice this fact underneath the generous terms of service. Don't be seduced into believing that, because the present terms are reasonable, you are in the same situation as you were with the cd distribution model. You are, in fact, handing more power over to the industry.
I think it is naive to believe that the terms you are presently under are anything other than a carrot to get people to buy into a drm system. Once the majority of people have accepted such a system control will be tightened down. There is no reason to think that the industry view has changed in any fundamental way in this regard.
People say, well you can burn it and rerip it. True and this is why I think it is naive to believe that they won't be doing away with burning down the road. There are already indications that the industry is pressuring to A. increase prices to 1.5 to 2.5 per track if they can't B. get rid of per track downloads entirely and force the purchase of full albums. C. reduce the number of downloads(and there is little doubt, in my mind, that this number will be reduced little by little until it is zero burns). |
|
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| reply to Steve
Please clarify. Are you against casual file trading where people just share and download a few songs or just the power users who brag about the gigs of stuff they have and would rather pay hundreds of dollars NOT paying for music? You didn't really clarify that on the start, and that might account for some of the bickering. |
|
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net | reply to asdfdfdf
sorry C. above should be "reduce the number of BURNS" |
|
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| reply to SRFireside
said by SRFireside :Please clarify. Are you against casual file trading where people just share and download a few songs or just the power users who brag about the gigs of stuff they have and would rather pay hundreds of dollars NOT paying for music? You didn't really clarify that on the start, and that might account for some of the bickering. I thought I was pretty clear on this ("burning through their 50G caps"), but I'll say it explicity.
Almost everybody shares with their friends, and this is not new to the computer world: making a copy of a cassette was common years and years ago. It's not really legal, but in many cases this casual trading *does* lead to music purchases. I know that people have sent me MP3s before: if I like it, I buy it.
Or if you own a vinyl album, grabbing the MP3 of a song that somebody else ripped doesn't seem like "stealing" to me either. You own a license to the music, you're just getting the bits in a different form.
These folks are not the problem.
It's the power users who are flagrant and brazen about it. I've heard people say "I won't ever pay for music" who are the problem. It's the teenagers to whom it *never occurs to them* that music is something you buy who are the problem.
Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| reply to fundamentalz
Re: That's A Good Knee Slapper
said by fundamentalz :I for one, am tired of the hate rally's that are the news postings relating to either piracy/RIAA, politicians, or international issues. Define hate rallies.
--
»www.hermes-press.com/brainwash1.htm |
|
