Crosswords2 mins ago
Should illegal file-sharers be kicked off the net?
12 Answers
European politicians have voted not to ban illegal file-sharers from the internet. This goes against what many governments have proposed to try and prevent illegal file downloading. Do you think that kicking people off the internet would be the answer to illegal fire-sharing?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7342135. stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7342135. stm
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by AB Asks. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Not all people who make records are vastly overpaid. I appear on a couple of dance compilation albums and am certainly no millionaire.
The royalties I get are always welcome and just about fund what I do. It's an easy excuse to blame megabucks popstars but not everyone is lucky enough to be in that boat.
The royalties I get are always welcome and just about fund what I do. It's an easy excuse to blame megabucks popstars but not everyone is lucky enough to be in that boat.
The name Orwell springs to mind.
Quote.
'Information gathered about individuals who persistently share music and movies online will be passed to a government unit that will issue warnings or ask for an individual's net access to be suspended or shut off.
The British government has floated similar plans but net firms have rejected calls for them to act as watchdogs'
We allready are being monitored but you just dont know it and if the s**t does hit the fan all they will do is make a few examples.
The logistics of kicking over half the internet users in the UK off line does not bear thinking about.
From a photo to a few lines from a book to a full dvd they all infringe a copyright so where do you draw the line.
I've been using torrents for many years now for myself and family but those who abuse the system for profit and go around selling latest releases in pubs and market stalls are the main reason the phonograph and film companys getting p****d at loosing so much revenue.
No matter what happens there will be a way around it
BBC iplayer cracked after one week. They plugged it and was cracked the next day.
Drm been cracked a while now still trying to plug that one.
Regional dvd codes, well thats a laugh.
Windows password encryption etc etc.
Sorry. Rant over.
Colin.
Quote.
'Information gathered about individuals who persistently share music and movies online will be passed to a government unit that will issue warnings or ask for an individual's net access to be suspended or shut off.
The British government has floated similar plans but net firms have rejected calls for them to act as watchdogs'
We allready are being monitored but you just dont know it and if the s**t does hit the fan all they will do is make a few examples.
The logistics of kicking over half the internet users in the UK off line does not bear thinking about.
From a photo to a few lines from a book to a full dvd they all infringe a copyright so where do you draw the line.
I've been using torrents for many years now for myself and family but those who abuse the system for profit and go around selling latest releases in pubs and market stalls are the main reason the phonograph and film companys getting p****d at loosing so much revenue.
No matter what happens there will be a way around it
BBC iplayer cracked after one week. They plugged it and was cracked the next day.
Drm been cracked a while now still trying to plug that one.
Regional dvd codes, well thats a laugh.
Windows password encryption etc etc.
Sorry. Rant over.
Colin.
My beef is not with stars, it's with record companies. The proportion of the retail price allocated to the composer and performers is minute.
tigersam258, the fact that the record companies *claim* their prices are high due to piracy, does not make it true.
Back in the 50s 60s and 70s the cost of producing a record was astronomical compared with today. You could knock recording facilities a couple of orders of magnitude better than (say) those used by the Beatles to record Sgt Pepper for a few thousand quid.
And yet , in those days, most record companies ran at a good profit, and still managed to retain on their books many non-profitable musicians, who were nurtured in the names of both investment and art. The job of the A and R man was highly skilled and fundamental to their success.
Today, record companies are run by accountants who think all they need is some magic formula and they can then churn out productions lines of manufactured bands at similar prices (but with massive profit hikes, due to reduced production costs) and they've got it cracked.
You need only look at prats the like of Simon Cowell to see what I mean - he would probably have rejected out of hand just about every major star of the past 50 years because they didn't fit his formula.
When this system fails to bring in the bucks, instead of questioning there products, pricing and delivery systems (what any other industry would do), they start looking for scapegoats and whining about the unfairness of it all.
In the meantime, people like me end up paying through the nose for music and then finding that we can't play it except under such restrictive circumstances as to make it worthless; after replacing my computer media player tells me I need to negotiate individually with each of my music suppliers to re-licence each track that I have paid for.
tigersam258, the fact that the record companies *claim* their prices are high due to piracy, does not make it true.
Back in the 50s 60s and 70s the cost of producing a record was astronomical compared with today. You could knock recording facilities a couple of orders of magnitude better than (say) those used by the Beatles to record Sgt Pepper for a few thousand quid.
And yet , in those days, most record companies ran at a good profit, and still managed to retain on their books many non-profitable musicians, who were nurtured in the names of both investment and art. The job of the A and R man was highly skilled and fundamental to their success.
Today, record companies are run by accountants who think all they need is some magic formula and they can then churn out productions lines of manufactured bands at similar prices (but with massive profit hikes, due to reduced production costs) and they've got it cracked.
You need only look at prats the like of Simon Cowell to see what I mean - he would probably have rejected out of hand just about every major star of the past 50 years because they didn't fit his formula.
When this system fails to bring in the bucks, instead of questioning there products, pricing and delivery systems (what any other industry would do), they start looking for scapegoats and whining about the unfairness of it all.
In the meantime, people like me end up paying through the nose for music and then finding that we can't play it except under such restrictive circumstances as to make it worthless; after replacing my computer media player tells me I need to negotiate individually with each of my music suppliers to re-licence each track that I have paid for.
agreed Rojash however they are in business to make money as well and I dont think anyone would condone going into HMV and stealing CDs/DVDs. it amounts to the same thing so why is there a justification if its online?
Personally, I dont want to pay the high price of them but they have us by the short and curlies. Either we pay the asking price or get it on the 'black market'. Thats been going on for years and will never change, its just the 21st century version of it now.
Personally, I dont want to pay the high price of them but they have us by the short and curlies. Either we pay the asking price or get it on the 'black market'. Thats been going on for years and will never change, its just the 21st century version of it now.
tigersam258, I wasn't intending to justify stealing - I'm both a musician and a software developer, and I wouldn't want people stealing my work. The point I was making is that many people who download files illegally do it because (a) they feel they are being ripped off, or (b) they want (quite reasonably) to be able to play their music on the devices of their choice, (c) they just want a sampler and will end up buying the record if they like it.
rojash, obviously you have a slightly more advanced knowledge of this than me and perhaps I am just a little bit more cynical but I think that there will always be people trying to make money by illegally downloading copyrighted stuff so the multinational record companies will always use that same excuse.
anyway good luck with your music and software ventures. :D
anyway good luck with your music and software ventures. :D
1 to 12 of 12
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
News4 mins ago
ChatterBank25 mins ago
News33 mins ago
News35 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.