Eagles singer Don Henley: EFF, Google "aid and abet" criminals
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
There is no First Amendment right to infringe intellectual property rights.
Neither is IP a constitutional right, only the congress' ability to create IP laws.I still find it fascinating how a single industry that's currently experiencing the same 'problem' as hundreds of industries and markets before them - namely, being made obsolete by technological advancement - is the first that thinks it is entitled to some sort of special rights to save their failing business model.
Personally I thought it was slightly interesting to see an actual musician's opinion rather than a nebulous "music industry" representative.
That was already happening. It is (or was) rare for artists to own the rights to their own works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKWaCOQre4A
To think that I've been reduced to such things. Say it ain't so, Don Henley!
Music is the only business where you can get away with calling potential buyers of your product "criminals".
Really, anything digital.
The Internet is an awesome thing but it's killed and killing a lot of industries and jobs. Jobs as Jeff Jarvis has pointed out (http://bit.ly/prM2gN) will not be replaced, rather they are gone forever. From the newspaper industry chain, to the hundreds of thousands of jobs to be lost in the postal service soon, the annihilated music business and soon the cable TV and retail industries.
Millions of jobs are lost and going to be lost. Thus I wonder if you still download torrents in the US how do you justify doing so? Also how old are you?
Q: How does an aspiring artist bridge the gap between distribution and commerce?
A: We have to be very clever about those things. You have to remember that it's only a few hundred years, if that much, that artists are working with money. Artists never got money. Artists had a patron, either the leader of the state or the duke of Weimar or somewhere, or the church, the pope. Or they had another job. I have another job. I make films. No one tells me what to do. But I make the money in the wine industry. You work another job and get up at five in the morning and write your script. This idea of Metallica or some rock n' roll singer being rich, that's not necessarily going to happen anymore. Because, as we enter into a new age, maybe art will be free. Maybe the students are right. They should be able to download music and movies. I'm going to be shot for saying this. But who said art has to cost money? And therefore, who says artists have to make money?
In the old days, 200 years ago, if you were a composer, the only way you could make money was to travel with the orchestra and be the conductor, because then you'd be paid as a musician. There was no recording. There were no record royalties. So I would say, "Try to disconnect the idea of cinema with the idea of making a living and money." Because there are ways around it.
http://the99percent.com/articles/6973/Francis-Ford-Coppola-O....
Can you answer me why these torrent sites are raking in the dough? What is attracting their traffic and visitors?
People willing to give them money.
> Can you answer me why these torrent sites are raking in the dough? What is attracting their traffic and visitors?
Convenience and a catalog that beats any other out there. You'll always have pirates, but the vast majority do it for convenience, not trying to avoid spending a couple bucks.
Who gives a rats ass about torrents-- they are but a small drop in the bucket of problems that "middle-man" industries actually have. Seriously, are you going to start blaming Hipmunk for the death of travel agencies? The answer is that nobody is at fault except industries that ignored the gigantic train whistle and massive shining light in the tunnel ahead. Yes, those jobs are lost. No, I really don't care about some sleazy A&R guy losing his job because all he knows is how to get wasted and take advantage of teens and early-20-year-olds who don't know any better. The gigantic level playing field is here, baby, and the only way to survive is to adapt-- which is to say, learn a new skill.
The record industry is appallingly inefficient. Millions are wasted or squandered on marketing, bribes, promotion and extravagances that serve no practical purpose. Smaller labels are often able to produce better quality music with tiny budgets. The recording industry is not particularly profitable at the moment because many incumbent players are so utterly wasteful with their capital.
Many other industries are presently under pressure because they are inefficient. Retail is unsustainable and cannot compete with internet-based competitors. Newspapers are suffering a crisis of identity in most regions due to their editorial directions. Many newspapers have moved towards sensationalist tabloid journalism which turns many people off spending actual money on them because they are not as crazy as actual cranks on the internet or they are offering inferior journalism when compared to the news outlets that didn't race to the bottom.
Then you try to claim that torrenting is the problem and not the fault of the companies themselves. How many people who download media do you think would buy it if the price and service was right? I would say near 100%. Many people who pirate music, movies and tv I know do it because they have no money for discretionary spending. Think students, the working poor, and those who cannot afford foreign prices on local wages. Region coding is probably the second biggest reason I know of for people to pirate things. Either the content is not available because of censorship, or it is unfairly priced or media companies place long delays on making it available. I would say my biggest reason for getting all my content legitimately was getting a US credit card. Prices in Australia are often twice what the exact same product costs in the US. There is no justification for this. Companies are capitalizing on artificial barriers to competition to wring additional profits out of their customers.
Capitalism isn't a charity, corporations don't get money simply for existing. If they cannot compete they should pull their funds out and invest in something that can turn a profit.
In economics, this process is called Creative Destruction[1]--meaning that new/better opportunities generally displace older less efficient industries and methods. Alternatively, what would the GGP or Jarvis have everyone do?
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction#Schumpeter...
I don't download torrents, and I'm finding a new productive job.
Though the millions and millions of busy workers are needed to drive economies. The pace in which the disruption is happening is swift and the pace the displaced workers finding work in this new digital workforce/economy isn't. Thus these displaced workers are a drag to society and the economy.
But maybe robotics on that level is still a long ways off.
Personally, I can't wait to have a computer chauffeur, and to know that the trucks around me are driven by computers that know of my car's presence and exact location by sight, networking, lidar, and however many other sources of data they have.
If I lived in countries that did not have access to hulu, netflix and other alternatives hollywood and the music business offers the US I would still be downloading!
I stopped downloading many years ago after the content industries provided legal and enjoyable alternatives.
thus I wonder why anyone still living in the US is still downloading copyrighted material when the content people bended and gave us some very good legal alternatives?