UK file-sharers will be 'cut off'

[Parrot of Doom]

HundredthIdiot said:

Frankeh said:

Pretty much all media should be subscription based now, and it will be in the future.

Why "should" it be? Who are you to assert what people can do with the things they create?

I prefer own stuff rather than rent it. Do I have to give up that right because you think the world should be subscription-based?

You don't own the music you buy.

[tinman0]

Frankeh said:

Newpapers are a good example. They've realised online news is where's it's at.

And they are slowly going broke.

Chicago Tribune closed last year, and one of the NY papers closed as well. Associated (DM owners) have already sold Evening Standard and the Metro, and most of their UK local newspapers.

I'm not sure you pick a worse example in newspapers to be honest.

[Blue Meanie]

Scraggles said:

currently using lastfm, shoutcast and occasionally spotify

had a spell of downloading albums a few years back, so thought would try some cd's for a change, only to get the sony "cd" with the free rootkit that fked up my pc

ended up having to format the drive to get rid of it as something else piggy backed the rootkit

not into itunes as have a sony mp3 player, it sounds a lot better than the music on an ipod and as the player is always in a pouch, not care what it looks like

it will not work with itunes and so i prefer DRM mp3

I do buy games from time to time, eg asassins creed, it is a single player offline game, so ubisoft decided to shaft it with DRM that needed you to go online in order to play it

iTunes is DRM free. Sony walkmans, etc, should play AAC files. AAC is an open format as far as I am aware.

[tinman0]

Blue Meanie said:

iTunes is DRM free. Sony walkmans, etc, should play AAC files. AAC is an open format as far as I am aware.

I just tested that! And you are absolutely right. Picked up a new SE W595 earlier today in fact, loaded a purchased iTunes m4a onto it just now, and it worked perfectly (album cover and all).

[Blue Meanie]

tinman0 said:

Blue Meanie said:

iTunes is DRM free. Sony walkmans, etc, should play AAC files. AAC is an open format as far as I am aware.

I just tested that! And you are absolutely right. Picked up a new SE W595 earlier today in fact, loaded a purchased iTunes m4a onto it just now, and it worked perfectly (album cover and all).

Don't believe all you read about the evils of iTunes, being locked to a certain player, and drm's. More often than not it is simply down to lack of knowledge.

Edited by Blue Meanie on Monday 19th April 20:27

[Frankeh]

tinman0 said:

I'm not sure you pick a worse example in newspapers to be honest.

They're a good example. Their business doesn't fit in to the new digital age, and as such they shut down.

What they didn't do was lobby governments to make viewing news online illegal.

Luckily for record companies, their product THRIVES in the digital age.

[Frankeh]

Pay per song is still not the right direction. You're paying how much the record companies think it's worth, not how much it's worth to YOU.
That's where a prescription model excels. You basically pay how much music is worth to you.

Lets take my example earlier of a subscription service charging £12.99 a month for unlimited streaming on PC and 75 DRM free song downloads.

Now we have jimmy. He downloads all 75 of his allocated amount. To him, that music is worth 13p per song.
Each artist he downloads from gets 17p for their track from that user..

Now lets look at sarah. There's not 75 songs she wants to download. In her month she only has 20 she wants to put on her ipod and listen to.
To her, each song is worth 64 pence. So each artist gets 64p from that user.

This is an example of a sustainable subscription service. First few months you would expect users to download all 75 to get some kind of backlog, but after that it'll slow down.

[joe_90]

tinman0 said:

joe_90 said:

Using the old 'would you steal a car' is stupid, if you could copy a car.. would you? If you could just copy that Veyron, just for 20 minutes.. with a less than .00000001% of getting caught.. you would not do it....?

The arrogance of some of you people is breathtaking. Seriously.

You could copy a Veyron, and VAG would be at your throat over patents and such like. It already happens. People invent new ways of doing things, they get a patent to protect their innovation, and then license it on occasion.

But hell, you go copy a Veyron, because its a victimless crime apparently.

I have a serious question for you - Do you respect anyone's rights or is it just a free for all?

I mean copy, like the holodeck on startrek, not physically part by part.. Think of this as an abstract example, as if you could clone the car... This is not a real example, obviously I cannot wave a magic wand and poof, another car exists, I do not have a replicator.

I think you may have missed the point..


Personally, I think the pay X amount and download what you want is the best approach, as mentioned above.. I guess I would almost end up paying the same as a physical CD, for the little music I download/buy/listen too, but knowing that I could just try that new album that is normally not my taste, I would pay for a full CD to find out its rubbish, but the artist gets paid, its a win win.. (edit, I think this is almost the model that Napster now uses)

The game has now moved on, they need to modify the business model.. Personally, I think the artists will have no issue, its the massive record companies, that want there massive fat slice it the issue here.

/edit to answer your direct question, yes I do, I listen to grooveshark, lastFm, iplayer, sound cloud etc, it costs me NOTHING, but am I still abusing the system?

However.. a more grey area is tv shows, mainly for the convenience (and no ads) the day after the show airs I may download to watch when I want. Technically wrong, yes. For me, it doesn't breach my personal morals. I pay my TV license/sky subs..

Edited by joe_90 on Monday 19th April 21:34

[Gnits]

Oh downloading is bad cos I did not pay? I don't pay anything for the radio stations to play the exact same tunes to me.
Now where is that tape recorder?

Don't tell me I pay for this via the tv license as that is essentially the same as me paying an ISP.

[Scraggles]

+1 to steam, also play games, like eveonline where it is a pay to play

cheers for the update about itunes

[tinman0]

Frankeh said:

Luckily for record companies, their product THRIVES in the digital age.

Not if you had your way.

[tinman0]

joe_90 said:

tinman0 said:

joe_90 said:

Using the old 'would you steal a car' is stupid, if you could copy a car.. would you? If you could just copy that Veyron, just for 20 minutes.. with a less than .00000001% of getting caught.. you would not do it....?

The arrogance of some of you people is breathtaking. Seriously.

You could copy a Veyron, and VAG would be at your throat over patents and such like. It already happens. People invent new ways of doing things, they get a patent to protect their innovation, and then license it on occasion.

But hell, you go copy a Veyron, because its a victimless crime apparently.

I have a serious question for you - Do you respect anyone's rights or is it just a free for all?

I mean copy, like the holodeck on startrek, not physically part by part.. Think of this as an abstract example, as if you could clone the car... This is not a real example, obviously I cannot wave a magic wand and poof, another car exists, I do not have a replicator.

What are you on about?

So the copy of the file you make, is like a holodeck copy? And therefore it's ok?

Please. There is a whole huge thread somewhere on PH. You are proving that cannabis is harmful.

[Frankeh]

tinman0 said:

Frankeh said:

Luckily for record companies, their product THRIVES in the digital age.

Not if you had your way.

Name another product you can distribute around the world for 0.045 cents. Paperclips, maybe.
You literally have no idea what you're talking about.

Edited by Frankeh on Monday 19th April 23:07

[HundredthIdiot]

Parrot of Doom said:

HundredthIdiot said:

Frankeh said:

Pretty much all media should be subscription based now, and it will be in the future.

Why "should" it be? Who are you to assert what people can do with the things they create?

I prefer own stuff rather than rent it. Do I have to give up that right because you think the world should be subscription-based?

You don't own the music you buy.

Well, yes and no. I understand the distinction, though you haven't made a clear point to respond to.

Can anyone tell me if it's worth attempting an adult discussion with Frankeh, or it is usually utterly futile? I don't hang around here as much as I used to; I've lost track.

[Frankeh]

How old are you, may I ask. It seems you're living in the past.

[Frankeh]

Your profile says geek.
As such I would think that you would understand the need to adapt to emerging technologies to survive.

It's the same reason we're not all still using floppy disks and dial up..

[bonsai]

HundredthIdiot said:

I've lost track.

Have you considered downloading another copy?

[scorp]

Frankeh said:

Name another product you can distribute around the world for 0.045 cents. Paperclips, maybe.
You literally have no idea what you're talking about.

Sure digital distribution is the cheapest way to get your stuff out, but the problem is it needs DRM to prevent people simply copying it on p2p networks, etc.

[joe_90]

tinman0 said:

joe_90 said:

tinman0 said:

joe_90 said:

Using the old 'would you steal a car' is stupid, if you could copy a car.. would you? If you could just copy that Veyron, just for 20 minutes.. with a less than .00000001% of getting caught.. you would not do it....?

The arrogance of some of you people is breathtaking. Seriously.

You could copy a Veyron, and VAG would be at your throat over patents and such like. It already happens. People invent new ways of doing things, they get a patent to protect their innovation, and then license it on occasion.

But hell, you go copy a Veyron, because its a victimless crime apparently.

I have a serious question for you - Do you respect anyone's rights or is it just a free for all?

I mean copy, like the holodeck on startrek, not physically part by part.. Think of this as an abstract example, as if you could clone the car... This is not a real example, obviously I cannot wave a magic wand and poof, another car exists, I do not have a replicator.

What are you on about?

So the copy of the file you make, is like a holodeck copy? And therefore it's ok?

Please. There is a whole huge thread somewhere on PH. You are proving that cannabis is harmful.

Do you get the concept of an abstract example, it mean nothing, its just moot point. The point if you understand basic computers is that if you copy the file you are copying a file, its not the same as stealing, its copyright infringement, which is different. Its wrong, but its not stealing a physical item. If someone you work with stole your CD's (you left lying on the table) you would notice, if they came and copied all the CDs to a harddrive, and put them back exactly as they were, you would not know.. They would have broken a different law.

Digital files are not physical, the are a digital medium, you cannot 'steal' them in the classic sense of the word.

They key point is things have moved on (see VHS), and the companies need to adapter or die to these changes.

[HundredthIdiot]

scorp said:

Sure digital distribution is the cheapest way to get your stuff out, but the problem is it needs DRM to prevent people simply copying it on p2p networks, etc.

It doesn't need DRM, in fact DRM has provably failed with music for obvious reasons. You end up punishing your customers and not punishing the freeloaders, which is just bad business.