Disney's Eisner Attacks Apple (and Others) In Front Of Congress
Reply 21 of 64
March 3, 2002 5:34PM
Personally, I don't give a flying you-know-what about Eisner or the MPAA, et. al. I do burn CDs with my music and hand them off to friends. The crime! A lot of times, they buy more CDs with those artists. The crime I say! This is FAR more true of people than, "I'll copy your whole collection and you can copy mine" paranoia in their heads. Yes, it happens and it will happen in spite of anything they do. Indeed, it is more likely to happen if they try to control content of our music.
In effect, this CD mix sharing is word of mouth about other artists, and the REAL fear of these companies is that someone besides them will determine who is hot, and this introduces the outside, albeit remote possibility at this point, that a grass-root popularity would leave them out of the profit loop for a short while. God only knows that they will sign these artists and make huge sums anyway. But they don't control these artists like they control their manufactured "products" -- be it Limp Bizkit or Mandy Moore. I think their real fear is that they cannot necessarily control those artists or the buyers, that they won't be able to manufacture the next Brittney or N'sync, which is a more lucrative scenario for them. It' not about artists or music, it's about their control over our listening choices and their bottom line profits.
Oh, but I don't care about their profits. They screw over nearly all recording artists as far as I can tell. These mix CDs pique people's interest in these bands and they go out and buy their stuff, and I do it regardless of what these fat execs think. It means they have less control over what we hear, what we are exposed to, and that takes control from them. God forbid someone has a mind of their own.
Screw the music nazis. Music is too important to human nature to let them control it.
Reply 22 of 64
March 3, 2002 7:14PM
Boldy defiant, yet insightful- here, here!
I wish there was some kind of proactive vehicle that could promote legal protection (or at least a presence) to the people by exposing the true intent behind big business motions vs. the "company line" motives. Big business just do whatever suits them w/o anybody to routinely put them in check. Public enemy
lately seems to be the big, nasty music industry. Someone big needs to stand up to them, just to cut them down a few levels (like the DOJ vs. M$).
(Also should be on "the list"- California real estate industry and CA phone companies...oh and, add in car insurance companies, too)
[ 03-03-2002: Message edited by: Randycat99 ]</p>
Reply 23 of 64
March 3, 2002 7:40PM
I think Apple is being singled out here. ATT Broadband adds--both print and tv--point to the blazing fast speed in which mp3s and video clips can be downloaded as a reason to subscribe to their broadband service, which is a much clearer invitation to piracy than Apple's rip, mix burn slogan.
Why are they going after the hardware manufacturers and not the Internet providers? Because they want to exploit the Internet for their own servies: to turn it into their own version of pay-tv.
[ 03-03-2002: Message edited by: jesperas ]</p>
Reply 24 of 64
March 3, 2002 8:41PM
Let's not let the fact that he's completely right get in the way.
Reply 25 of 64
March 3, 2002 9:23PM
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>Let's not let the fact that he's completely right get in the way.
But he's not.
Reply 26 of 64
March 3, 2002 10:13PM
[quote]But he's not.<hr></blockquote>
"The killer app for the computer industry is piracy,"
"They think their short-term growth is predicated on pirated content."
How are these, in any way, false statements?
Do you think a smaller-than-small print "Don't Steal Music" is actually an attempt to keep people from stealing music? If they were serious about it they'd set up draconian "protections" like Microsoft, et al do.
There is 0 effort on Apple's part to discourage piracy. I don't think it's a bad thing, but let's pull our heads out of our asses and see what's going on around us.
What product did Apple tout when finally jumping on the CD-R bandwagon? Why, iTunes, of course.
iTunes is one of the easiest tools around to edit id3 tags and make a nice, tidy proper collection of illegal mp3s.
Apple is making money off of piracy (*ahem*iPod*ahem*) and they love it.
Reply 27 of 64
March 3, 2002 10:40PM
Is piracy a problem? Yes, absolutely. Are hardware manufactureres, specifcally Apple, responsible for promoting piracy? Absolutely not. CDRW, iTunes, iPod, etc., can all be used legally and legitimately; whether or not they ARE used in a legal fashion is the responsibility of the user. The protections built into Microsoft's products are to protect its own interests, not out of some altruistic crusade against piracy. Windows media format, anyone?
If they're going after Apple and other hardware manufactuers for this, then they might as well go after the photocopier companies like Xerox for promoting theft of copyrighted print media, or any stereo maker that dares put a "record" button on their tape players.
Reply 28 of 64
March 3, 2002 10:53PM
[quote]Are hardware manufactureres, specifcally Apple, responsible for promoting piracy?<hr></blockquote>
For promoting piracy? Absolutely.
They make piracy very very rewarding. And don't think for a second that it's not on purpose.
I know you guys cringe at the mere assertion that Apple isn't always 100% forthright, but I'm afraid that Eisner is right on the money here.
Reply 29 of 64
March 4, 2002 10:06AM
Do not attempt. Professional driver on closed course.
Some restrictions apply.
Side effects include dry mouth, diarrhea and headaches...
Don't steal music.
Reply 30 of 64
March 4, 2002 3:48PM
Piracy is NOT the draw of CDR's and MP3. Sure everyone who frequents these boards are fairly advanced users. I would believe Groverat if I walked in one day and saw my Mother on Morpheus downloading MP3's and making bootleg CD's. She is not. And I venture that MOST computer users are not. The sad part about this is the fact that these Industries like Disney and the Music/Video Industry have such an intense case of paranoia that it colors everything they say and do. Their customers are now perceived as potential thieves ready to cut into their gross profits. Its a shame ..it really is. Now they want our computers stuffed with anti piracy features. Computers were devised to help it's users complete tasks and allow them to become more effictive. They weren't created as some bridge for commercial entities to attemtp to extract your hard earned money(sure one could say that Application Vendors have the same motive...but we aren't adding copyright protection to our computers in lieu of their demands). It really boils down to Disney needs US...we don't need Disney. I could just as easily choose another product. If you're tired of acting like you purpose in life is to support these commercial leaches then get some balls and say....yes...theft does happen but consumers are tired of hearing lies and seeing no changes. Give us a good product without stiffing us and we'll buy it. If you produce expensive crap...we don't buy...although some might steal.
Reply 31 of 64
March 4, 2002 3:53PM
personaly, attacking the rip,mix,burn add makes about as much sence as saying, "intel sounds to much like bintel, witch in the kingslawoo language stands for binge, it must mean that they want people to get drunk!", anyway thats my opinion, another opinion is the fact that with the pcs seperatly mounted cd-r, etc make it far easier to copy music.
Reply 32 of 64
March 4, 2002 4:09PM
[quote]Originally posted by hmurchison:
<strong>Piracy is NOT the draw of CDR's and MP3. Sure everyone who frequents these boards are fairly advanced users. I would believe Groverat if I walked in one day and saw my Mother on Morpheus downloading MP3's and making bootleg CD's. She is not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Maybe not, but it wouldn't require a great stretch of the imagination to think, if she uses MP3s and CD-Rs, she might rip CDs she's borrowed from a friend, or perhaps burn mix CDs for friends.
I agree with the rest of your post though, and question whether the situation above is really a great problem for the industry.
It annoys me that I pay $13-14 for a new CD, and then read that the industry is upset that people make bootleg copies, and claim it's - and this
gets me -
hurting the artists
It annoys me that I pay $20 for a DVD, then read quotes from the industry in Daily Variety commenting on what a fantastic cash cow the DVD market is.
Reply 33 of 64
March 4, 2002 4:50PM
We need to remember that every major media improvement from VHS and Audio-cassette to CD/CDrw/minidisc/MP3/DVD has led to nothing but growth for record labels and film/TV studios. We buy more CD's and DVDs today than we've ever bought any other kind of media before.
, above, has described it best. More often than not, music sharing leads to much more music buying! Fans will buy. Sharing creates fans.
I suspect the real fear for record companies is that they will not be able to set prices to whatever ridiculously high level they would like. CD's have levelled off to a relatively fair price (in N.America) and people will buy them regardless of the availability of 'free' material. DVD's started off high and have dropped considerably in recent months. But, even fans will tolerate only so much gouging before they turn to 'alternative methods' to get what they want. In short, these very big and very rich companies don't like the idea of anything that might keep them honest.
That principle divulges two ways. As setting a slightly lower limit on pricing, and perhaps more troublingly for record companies, by reducing their control over
(and not as they would have you think over consumers)
Many successful acts need to tour to make money. Unless an album cracks the 5-6Million sales mark, each member of a band isn't going to take home as much as you think. Those with star power will make a huge sum in combined revenue from sales and merchandising (for a short time) but the working rock band, makes money by touring, mainly. You sell records and get airplay so you can play bigger venues. If you play big venue, and have successful tours, you get rich. Otherwise, you quickly find that you haven't really made all that much for yourself. Just ask decent selling dance music acts. Not a whole lot of multi-million dollar artists there. Sure some of them sell 1-2 million a couple of albums over, but they really can't tour the same way Rock-pop-country-rap artists can. Translation, they make a living, even a good one, but for the most part they never make the huge money!
Now think about the internet, not as it is today, but with the penetration and speed that it will have in 10-20 years. If I'm an artist that makes most of his money touring, WTF do I need a record company for? I get known with a good web presence, I get airplay and fans from that. I get bigger and bigger tour dates from publicity (that I initiate and control). I don't need Universal. I don't need Vivendi. I don't need anyone.
I only need access to networks of talented people. Talents will find each other regardless, especially with the easy communication that the net provides. More artists will go it alone. The same concept of keeping them honest applies: I might sign a record deal, but if the price gets too high, I'll just go it alone. The cost of production, and marketing is going to get a whole lot more affordable once a few notable success stories emerge from the 'go it alone' route.
Record Companies are scared, and they should be.
Reply 34 of 64
March 4, 2002 5:29PM
Without technologies like mp3, CD-R, and even peer-to-peer file transferring services, the music industry would see much less growth.
Don't make me pull out press releases from the RIAA website that indicate an alsost catalytic burst in music sales from 1998 through 2000. I think the sales numbers increased 20%.
Or is that a result of rising CD prices...I thought CDs were supposed to get cheaper over time.
The recording industry is pirating from the artists.
Reply 35 of 64
March 4, 2002 6:51PM
My mother makes mix CDs from downloaded/ripped songs that aren't hers legally, she plays them at work. My grandmother actually made one (w/ Christmas music) with Dell's bundled software and me introducing her to Morpheus.
All this "RIAA is evil, they steal from artists..." is all well and good, but it has nothing at all to do with the point of contention.
Apple and others knowingly profit from piracy and does little (if anything) to avoid it.
[quote]Piracy is NOT the draw of CDR's and MP3.<hr></blockquote>
Riiiiight. *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge*
- Napster introduced.
- CD-R drives/media sales skyrocket.
It's just a coincidence.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
(I use my CD-Rs to hold my 40k word documents!) <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Reply 36 of 64
March 4, 2002 7:41PM
Well personally, I use CDRs to archive client projects and back up critical files from my hard drive.
Groverat, sounds like you need to give your family an education on copyright law.
Now how exactly does Apple profit from piracy? All of the iApps are free products, and let's not forget that those types of software (mp3 players/encoders, digital image managers, DV editing) existed in one form or another long before Apple came out with their own versions and stuck its iTrademark on it. Remember all of the bitching going on when Apple stuck DVD ROM drives on their computers, while the rest of the PC industry went with CDRW drives? I do. The only reason why Apple went with recordable optical drives is because that's what the market wanted.
Oh sure, everyone buys CDRs to steal music and video clips. Please. Let's just overlook the fact that CDRs are the most economic form of removable media storage in existence today. 650 MB for pennies.
Reply 37 of 64
March 4, 2002 7:46PM
Napster introduced in early 1999.
CD-R became wildly popular last year.
I don't see any direct correlation.
I do see CD sales rising amid Napster's popularity. And I do see that the RIAA had been playing the lame duck about CD-R before Napster even appeared.
The internet as a music distributor, has increased the music industry's bottom line as a whole. And places like mp3.com fostered many musicians when big record labels only care about the next N'Sync and Mandy Moore.
Take a look at these.
Reply 38 of 64
March 4, 2002 7:51PM
[quote]Well personally, I use CDRs to archive client projects and back up critical files from my hard drive.<hr></blockquote>
What % of the CD-R media sold do you think go to legal pursuits?
I'd say 20-25% at the absolute most.
I personally use it for less than that, maybe .5-1% of my CD-Rs are used for legal pursuits.
[quote]Groverat, sounds like you need to give your family an education on copyright law.<hr></blockquote>
That would be inconsistent, since I'm the one who taught them how to do all the naughty things.
[quote]Now how exactly does Apple profit from piracy?<hr></blockquote>
Let's see... by selling CD-R equipped Macs. Touting mp3->CD as a great feature. The iPod.
[quote]All of the iApps are free products,<hr></blockquote>
They foster the sale of Macs. They are a selling point.
[quote]The only reason why Apple went with recordable optical drives is because that's what the market wanted.<hr></blockquote>
And why did the market want CD-R?
[quote]Oh sure, everyone buys CDRs to steal music and video clips. Please. Let's just overlook the fact that CDRs are the most economic form of removable media storage in existence today. 650 MB for pennies.<hr></blockquote>
Not just music and video clips. Software, too.
Name a few things that require such large removeable storage and how that reflects on the massive surge in *consumers* buying CD-R drives/media.
Reply 39 of 64
March 4, 2002 8:01PM
Groverat, are you aware of "fair use?" I'd bet at least 50% of all CD-Rs stay with the owner of the original content, a very conservative estimate for you. And why aren't photographers, magazines and other visual media people having such a fit about their images being saved and distributed? Why is it only DVDs and music that's threatened according to them?
Puh-leeze. Cassettes in the 80's and 90's didn't cause such a commotion, why would mp3's be so destuctive to music sales? Perhaps they should stop charging $16-$18 per $0.25 CD pressing and $0.25 that goes to the artist. Maybe people won't be tempted to pirate if they could deal with reasonable prices in the first place. Blame blame blame: someone else. They should take a good look in the mirror before they spout off about the typical "pirate" consumer.
Reply 40 of 64
March 4, 2002 8:26PM
Yes people are copying a lot of music. But contrary to RIAA rhetoric, sales of music and movies continue to grow year over year at a significant rate. I still contend that music 'sharing' leads to more music 'buying'. I've seen my fair share of MP3's, but I also own more than 300 CD's (bought first and second hand) There are a lot of discs in that collection that I
would have even known about if it weren't for MP3's.
Casettes increased the sales of LP's. CDrw increases sales of CD. Simple. And true. RIAA isn't worried about piracy -- a percentage will never pay for music, and always stay ahead of the latest copy-protection scheme -- this is just a cover for an industry fight. They're worried about distribution and control over ARTISTS, and the value of publication. When I can promote and publish myself effectively, the major record labels will be reduced to the role of agents/PR firms. Their services won't be worth nearly as much as they currently are. It's the real issue. Consumers, despite a fair amount of copying, are buying ever increasing amounts of music.
See my previous post. This isn't about 'file sharing' it's about how 'file sharing' will eventually upset a very lucrative promotional structure.