Cracks show in music industry over P2P enforcement Divisions inside the music business have prompted its umbrella trade organisation to issue a statement today denying any serious rift, while dodging the issue of whether it will urge the government to cut off persistent pirates from the net. The ructions were provoked by last week's statement from the Featured Artists …
We're now at the point where pretty much every Labour plan that isn't already beyond the point of no return is not worth thinking about. With a probable spring election in the offing, and electioneering well-and-truly under way, what the Tories plan to do about P2P file-sharing is much more important...
But what is it they plan to do? As far as I can tell, there is no current Tory policy on the future of the music industry.
Move with the times. Charge appropriately for legal access to the music and people will pay for it.
The Charts were originally based on sheet music sales. When records became big business, the industry moved the goalpost for The Charts. When downloads became big business, the industry moved the goalpost again for The Charts.
HOWEVER - why has the cost of a track remained the same despite there no longer being a requirement for a transport medium (record, tape, CD), no requirement for distribution of the medium, and no requirement for high street shops with rent and staff to sell them.
It's called PROFITEERING by the record industry, especially where the author and artist actually receive a SMALLER PERCENTAGE than they do for hard media sales.
The Music Industry - get your house in order and the people will come. Keep screwing them over and they'll continue to screw you back!
it's almost like democracy. When that Orlowski (or however it's spelt) chap produces his invective filled, fact-less articles, there's never a comment box. Would el reg like to comment? No? I thought not. Would el reg like to publish this comment? No? I thought not.
They're ripping us off with the false division of the world into DVD regions.
They're ripping us off by charging more in the UK than elsewhere
They're ripping us off by charging way too much to everyone regardless of where they are (how can a DVD be worth £25 one day then 3 months later it's £2)
Why should MP3 downloads be any different ?
And why did Lily "The talentless tart should be left in a sack of Bream to die" Allen think she's got the right to say anything on the subject,?
I would rather get a 'tap' on the shoulder and be told to stop than to get a court summons which I have little chance of defending myself against.
I would also like to see the measures formalised so I know how far I can go and the risk I am taking. As it is now you have no idea of the risk you take when you freetard and with some of the out-of-proportion awards being given to the record labels that price can be too high
Just my opinion. I know! I know! infringement of human rights blah blah blah but if big business is losing money then somebody is going to be made to pay and I would rather it wasn't me.
I see it a bit like a speeding ticket. It stings for a while but it does make me a lot more careful when I'm speeding.
Obviously I would like to carry freetarding until the day I die 'sticking it to the man' but lets face it, it is a little too easy!
She's one of the yoof, is down wid dat shit, connects with the young filesharing miscreants etc. And naturally is whiter than white ... i mean, has more holes than thou, ...er, she's a good girl, and wouldn't do or be involved in anything even slightly illegal, as evidenced from her backside, i mean back catalogue.
Orlowski invites emails, in which format he is happy to accept any criticism, because he prefers sensible debate to the gibbon food-fight of comments.
Besides the management have agreed that I need the odd thread off, because they are frightened that one day I will snap and go on a kill-crazy rampage with a blunt kitchen knife.
I agree with what you are saying, but I have a major caveat and that is what is the burden of proof required for a strike. Reading what the French are proposing and other articles about game file sharing. It seems to me all that is required will be for the labels to say you did it and thats all there is. No proof, no investigation. Just there word. And thats scary.
They're ripping us off by charging more in the UK than elsewhere
-Check out Australia.....
They're ripping us off by charging way too much to everyone regardless of where they are (how can a DVD be worth £25 one day then 3 months later it's £2)
-Because when its new not enough people have watched it and spread the word that its crap, gouge who you can then try and get rid of whatever stock is left sems to be the motto for DVDs.
And why did Lily "The talentless tart should be left in a sack of Bream to die" Allen think she's got the right to say anything on the subject,?
-Because like most celebs shes ready to grab any bit of publicity she can get... i wonder more about why any one would bother to put her opinions in their publications
Badgers because they , like the music industry, are vicous and tend to attack anything in their way rather than adapt or work around it. (Also, unlike the music industry, they have a cool theme tune... mushroom mushroom SNAKE!)
... does put comments on some articles, even in reviews (which are usually the best way to get tard wars going)... he also has nice chats over emails too... not quite sure where the sudden "bully" claims towards the guy came from... perhaps you feel the only way to debate things or give your opinions are via fairly anonymous handles in articles on the subjects... sucks to be you.
Incidentally, the ability for commentards to comment on el-reg articles isn't a god given right, perhaps you could argue that it's used too much by authors on subjects that come up almost daily (apple rumours, new windows os, etc), maybe they should take pity on our moderatrix and save the lady from the bile we churn out on random subjects from celeb deaths, to wifi security issues, to scientology mocking, to privacy laws...
Paris - because she's been keeping her head down lately... err.. as in quiet...
Up to him if he wants discussion via email, but in any disagreement there is no gain to be had in discussions by email.
Either he wins, in which case he comments on his win, or he loses in which case nobody knows because nobody sees it. You'd have to be a mug to get into an email baboon fight on those terms.
I don't read his articles, if they were flagged as 'OR' in the reader feed I would not click them either. It's not that he never says interesting things, it's that he doesn't believe in them enough to climb into the cage and face death by a thousand bananas.
Sometimes commenter say very insightful things too, like "does Orlowski get more visitors reading his articles than commenters reading comments?" which makes the comments often worth reading more than the articles.
"You'd have to be a mug to get into an email baboon fight on those terms."
But argueing in a comments section makes winners, correct? lol...
I love the comments section, I'm not saying it's bad, I like a good debate too, over any medium, I'm saying just because somebody doesn't enable comments on most of his/her articles doesn't make them a coward or a bully - just means they don't enable comments... I'd say that about any author on here, it just happened to be Orlowski's name that was mentioned.
"Are you saying that internet comments are not in fact a gibbon food-fight? It's verifiable fact."
Whether or not the analogy is correct and verifiable is one thing... that internet comments are actual, real conflicts involving members of that particular species and that these conflicts concern foot items... I think not.
...would you enforce it anyway?
There is no legal requirement for hosting companies to log and report on what connections download what is there?
It's fairly easy to have an encrypted connection - so sniffing won't do.
Even if the host logged and gave up logs linking IP to file, they would then need to request the the user relating to the IP at the time of the download from the ISP.
I can't see how you could inforce this anyway - without using pure conjecture.
I think the music industry needs to stop fighting this one - they will NEVER beat the hardcore of illegal filesharers but they could easily profit from the majority if they started putting the effort and money into serving this market rather than fighting it.
If a favourite writer of mine is consistently entertaining and tells me new stuff, then I don't care whether they have comments or not. Or whether they live on the blue mould scraped from Stiltons. Or stout. They have no other obligation to me other than to be interesting. But they need to keep coming up with the goods.
The comments here are fun and I've turned some of the consistently brilliant commenters into paid frontline contributors at the Reg, on the basis that if you've got something interesting to say, we want everyone to read it - and will pay you. But it's fact that for many subject areas, I'd never have got the stories at all if I had comments turned on. Eg, SpinVox.
"Either he wins, in which case he comments on his win, or he loses in which case nobody knows because nobody sees it."
Gosh, you sound quite ground down by life. Bullying, perhaps? However, you're forgetting the times where a reader changes the writer's point of view forever - it happens quite a lot if you are a) armed with a good argument and b) can express it well. You lot consistently delight me. But maybe in your particular case, sir - you aren't, and can't.
You know it seems people in the UK take for granted their news sources having good editorial staffs but here in the states it seems half our news doesn't have a living breathing editor at all (see djs that killed woman by drinking too much water, NY times reporters that faked stories, etc). Many Americans enjoy this site because to be honest our news is basically just press releases from the big corps and the government plus astroturf. So I say Mr. Orlowski can occasionally turn off comments as long as he keeps up the good work and doesn't sell out. The day I see a friggin ZDNet graphic across the top of the page is the day I get in the baboon email fight.
"I assume I'm the Orlowskitard??"
No Orlowski is the Orlowskitard*, and because of the lack of threading you have conflated multiple ACs into one (I am not the AC you exchanged bananas with higher up in the thread my comment was not address to your subthread). Lack of threading is a big problem with elReg hence the @@ notation as a stopgap measure.
"But argueing in a comments section makes winners, correct? lol..."
By *winning* the argument makes you a winner, doing it in public sways independent readers opinions. You cannot convince an opinionated person, only neutral onlookers. So what is the point of arguing by email with OT who is opinionated?
Enabling comments on a topic provides a far more interesting read than just the article itself.
Yes, sometimes the threads descend into farce and ignorance but nevertheless, may provide an opportunity for people to broaden their understanding of an issue, rather than just being preached at.
Also, many contributors are far more knowledgeable than the article's author and can provide significantly different points of view or alternative suggestions that would otherwise remain "not common knowledge".
"Gosh, you sound quite ground down by life. Bullying, perhaps?"
Or perhaps I'm right, perhaps you take a viewpoint and stick with it regardless, this is not a good or bad trait, it's just one I don't see the point of entering into private debate with.
"However, you're forgetting the times where a reader changes the writer's point of view forever - it happens quite a lot if you are a) armed with a good argument and b) can express it well. You lot consistently delight me. But maybe in your particular case, sir - you aren't, and can't."
Imagine if you were an independent judge, and someone was saying that another person aren't or can't change their view. Does that person strike you as flexible or inflexible?
To me it's very simple, in a football match the referee decides the winner, not the opposing team, so a situation where the opposing team decides the winner is a no win situation.
I've often asked if you were one of the owners of elReg, are you?
> They're ripping us off with the false division of the world into DVD regions.
Agreed.
>They're ripping us off by charging way too much to everyone regardless of where they are (how can a DVD be worth £25 one day then 3 months later it's £2)
Agreed.
>And why did Lily "The talentless tart should be left in a sack of Bream to die" Allen think she's got the right to say anything on the subject,?
Very much agreed.
>They're ripping us off by charging more in the UK than elsewhere
This however? Australia here. I call. And raise.
1) T-shirt boy... aw. Eight years and you're still sore about it. You need to work through this and let it go. It's hard, but you can do it. (Or you could email him. He'll probably give you the t-shirt off his own back, eh Andrew?)
2) I don't know why people feel the need to actually wish horrible death on celebrities. What's all this elaborate Lily Allen torture? Christ. I wished terrible things on postal workers and estate agents this week (they've actually affected my life, while I'm not sure I believe Lily Allen has done anything to inconvenience or aggrieve you) but then I took it back, because I realised that it's Not Very Nice.
3) Everything needs comments now because readers have a certain sense of entitlement about an instant right of reply - not only that but a right to publication. Fine. I'd say I can't complain because it keeps me in work, but Moderator is not what it says on my job contract, so I can't really say that. But journalism is not necessarily preaching, journalists and readers are not automatically in opposition... and you'll be sorry when all articles consist of a title explaining the subject and the words "What do you think? Why don't you tell us what you Reckon?"
And so will I.
Now, back on topic, bitches.
@npupp
Her back catalogue, now there are some criminal records <ba da bum>
and watch the tumbleweed go rolling by
So what's the price of a new DVD/CD/Bluray (bluray...bwa ha ha like I'm going to buy all my films again, this time for even more money) in OZ/NZ land...see what I did there :P
The bit about getting rid of stock...how much stock can there be? The local supermarkets have all got old things like gladiator for £2 but they've also got new "special/dircetors cut/platinum/wadeva" editions for £2 as well.
Paris because even though she's had a criminal record, she's not deluded enough to think that talking off key about her lack of communication skills is classed as a song.
>UK Music suggested that on their third warning, illegal filesharers should be cut off for 72 hours, for a month on their fourth warning, and on their fifth for two months.<
Heh, that sounds fair to me, second warning go virtual encrypted whatever it is, third warning visit a friends for two days, fourth and fifth warning rent a dongle for email and surfing then go usenet. It's kind'a like a bad joke. If the copyright mafia are serious, they should simply take the filesharer to court where the burden of proof is on them. I'm assuming they hope the first warning will frighten most filesharers into stopping.
I mean, this is obviously so very much more important than innocent civilians dying in Afghanistan and Iraq, people still starving to death in third world countries, Chinese human rights abuses, rape of the natural world, loss of basic freedoms and the rapidly diminishing oil reserves.
@ Dunncha
>I would rather get a 'tap' on the shoulder and be told to stop than to get a court summons which I have little chance of defending myself against.<
Don't ever do this, it's just a logic exercise...
borrow a laptop and change its name to Hakerun1te, log onto your router and do some surfing, bingo, proof that someone hacked your router (the laptops name will appear on the routers list of connected PCs). This will also allow you to query the validity of access being suspended too. Maybe.
I've read a large number of comment threads on El Reg and other sites like The Times Online and I can't remember anyone ever winning an argument. Someone might post an opinion that a few people agree with and one or two might even say so, but that's about it. Tomorrow the article drifts into the archive and is forgotten, till next time a similar red rag is waved at the bull and another set of posters have the same discussion.
More to the point, do the people who take decisions about these things actually bother to read comments on El Reg or anywhere else? I doubt it. Lord Mandelson is more likely to have his opinion formed at a DTI cocktail party or on the letters page of print version of the The Daily Telegraph.
... you'll never know what we actually think of not having the ability to comment, because we don't have the ability to comment.
And what's even more annoying, if we find this logical paradox amusing, we can't tell you, because ... well, you get the idea.
@Sarah Bee:
Comments are the equivalent of the guy singing outside your bedroom window at three o'clock in the morning. You can applaud, or blow rasberries, or shoot him dead*, or ignore him. But at the end of the day, it's only evens he's doing it for you.
It has to be said ... commenters don't necessarily care what the people at the site think, either.
(*This is a metaphor. I can shoot people dead in a metaphor. It's even legal.)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
