Main > Main Forum
Wow... This p'd me off... (Seller's 'miracle of an invention')
DaveMMR:
--- Quote from: Vigo on July 19, 2011, 05:03:48 pm ---Piracy can have a major positive impact on a product. Think about Adobe Photoshop for a second. A commercial program that for years was wildly pirated, yet now it is common lingo with anybody computer literate. Adobe seemed to do very little about people pirating their software for many years, as long as commercial users paid for the program. Now every Tom, Dick and Harry who pirated the program back in the 90's as kid exclusively uses Photoshop (and subsequently premiere, illustrator, indesign, etc.) Now if Adobe was efficient at stopping piracy from day 1, nobody would have dared pay the $1000 price tag the program used to cost, the program would not be nearly successful, the kids who grew up using photoshop were inspired enough to go in to graphic design and use this program with their own business. Because of photoshop and the rampant piracy, there are graphic designers everywhere. It's no coincidence.
--- End quote ---
That is a valid point - Photoshop would not be as popular today if it weren't for piracy. But it is interesting to add that Adobe is actively FIGHTING the use of the word "Photoshop" to mean digital editing of photos lest it becomes genericized and exploited by competitors and legal protection of said trademark lost (Aspirin, Dumpster, Thermos, Zipper and Yo-Yo were all trademarked at one time). So it is quite possible that an Adobe CEO may have a different opinion on its popularity. To him/her, not only was their software pirated by non-professionals, but their brand name is actually being threatened.
--- Quote from: Vigo on July 19, 2011, 05:03:48 pm ---For all the artists that don't get paid for their work, welcome to the world of being an artist. Van Gogh and countless other artists had the same problem; it's nothing new to the 21st century.
--- End quote ---
Actually it is, if you're talking about music. Yes, people were taping songs off the radio or dubbing their friend's cassettes, but record sales were relatively healthy until the dawn of the 21st century (when Napster was at its peak). Nowadays, artists get paid by just selling their songs directly to the fans. But even when they do something unique, like offer an entire album for whatever you want to pay - down to a penny (Radiohead's "In Rainbows") - people still stole it.
Donkbaca:
Meh, the record company ripped us off for a good two decades because of CD's. Hey, I know you already bought this album as a casette, and as a record, but you need to buy it AGAIN as a cd, oh and its going to be 3 times as expensive because cd's are so much more expensive. That's essentially the line they fed us for the 80's and half of the 90's. Liar, liar, pants on fire! The focus went from putting together a bunch of good songs to create an album to putting a couple of good songs on a cd, you push the hell out of one or two songs and then you charge someone 15-20 bucks and make them buy the whole cd just for that one song. When the public found out how cheap it actually was to make cd's, the record company didn't budge. Held us hostage. You want to own this one song? Pay 20 bucks for the whole album sucka!
I used to feel guilty about downloading music, but now I just don't. If you like an artist, go see them in concert, they get a bigger cut of their show money than they do record sales anyway. Besides, I work every day for my money. It would be sweet if someone like, recorded one weeks worth of work from me, and then I could just replay it over and over and get paid for it. Why should someone like Neil Diamond STILL be making money of a song he recorded 20 years ago?
emphatic:
--- Quote from: Donkbaca on July 19, 2011, 07:18:23 pm ---Meh, the record company ripped us off for a good two decades because of CD's. Hey, I know you already bought this album as a casette, and as a record, but you need to buy it AGAIN as a cd, oh and its going to be 3 times as expensive because cd's are so much more expensive. That's essentially the line they fed us for the 80's and half of the 90's. Liar, liar, pants on fire! The focus went from putting together a bunch of good songs to create an album to putting a couple of good songs on a cd, you push the hell out of one or two songs and then you charge someone 15-20 bucks and make them buy the whole cd just for that one song. When the public found out how cheap it actually was to make cd's, the record company didn't budge. Held us hostage. You want to own this one song? Pay 20 bucks for the whole album sucka!
I used to feel guilty about downloading music, but now I just don't. If you like an artist, go see them in concert, they get a bigger cut of their show money than they do record sales anyway. Besides, I work every day for my money. It would be sweet if someone like, recorded one weeks worth of work from me, and then I could just replay it over and over and get paid for it. Why should someone like Neil Diamond STILL be making money of a song he recorded 20 years ago?
--- End quote ---
In Sweden we have special taxes on empty media that goes towards the recording industry, or as I like to call 'em, the mob. They collect on all empty CD-R discs, and now even hdd's etc, but it's STILL illegal to download stuff even though they get paid for media that in many, many cases doesn't even end up containing copyrighted stuff. They fail to understand technology progress when it puts money in their pockets for sure.
CheffoJeffo:
--- Quote from: Donkbaca on July 19, 2011, 07:18:23 pm ---Meh, the record company ripped us off for a good two decades because of CD's. Hey, I know you already bought this album as a casette, and as a record, but you need to buy it AGAIN as a cd, oh and its going to be 3 times as expensive because cd's are so much more expensive.
--- End quote ---
The fact that you failed to recognize the value of the Maxell XL-IIs aside (really, who bought both the album and the cassette :dizzy:), your argument for pirating music today is that the record companies held a gun to your head to make you buy CDs 20 years ago (and, really, who was forced to replace their albums and cassettes with CDs :dunno), when every one of your complaints has not been an issue in quite a while ? ::)
--- Quote from: Donkbaca on July 19, 2011, 07:18:23 pm ---Besides, I work every day for my money. It would be sweet if someone like, recorded one weeks worth of work from me, and then I could just replay it over and over and get paid for it. Why should someone like Neil Diamond STILL be making money of a song he recorded 20 years ago?
--- End quote ---
Was your work performed as work-for-hire or do you own the end product ?
I still get paid for the use of work I created a decade ago -- because I own the rights to the product. If I did that work for somebody else and received a salary, then I would have no such rights. I didn't, hence I should still get paid while that work has value in the market. Same goes for Neil Diamond.
Donkbaca:
I am just saying I have no sympathy for the music industry.
You are right, its all about markets. I buy some stuff, I download some stuff. I don't feel bad about downloading the stuff I do. I just don't. In fact if I had to PAY for some of the stuff I download, I just wouldn't have it at all. That's price discrimination and how effiecient markets work. We all have different price points for different goods.
Then there is the whole argument that copyrights discourage innovation, but I am on the fence about that one.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version