Before open source software came back into vogue, I used to copy the commercial programs in order to have programs to use. I was poor at the time and could not afford the unreasonably high proce that these companies charged. I used the “pirated” software to increase my knowlege as well as my income. When I was in a position to be able to buy the company sanction version of the same software, I did so. “Piracy” actually caused the company to gain a sale that they would not had before. Now if the cartels war to stamp out “piracy” was 100% successful, they would not have gained me as a customer.

I no longer buy product from the software cartels due to the fact that I have embraced free and open source software. I can now get the same functionality for a much lower price. In fact, the only price that I pay is the donation I send to the project (which is much lower than the asking price of the cartel produced product). I also have the option to adapt the software to better suit my needs. This is what the entertainment and software cartels should really worry about, the independents. You see, I have outsourced my business to the independents because thay produce nearly the same product at a minimal cost.

The cartels have decided to bypass workers in “developed” countries in order to exploit slaves in less developed countries. This has resulted in a great loss of income for the workers in the “developed” countries. Where one person’s wages could support a family in the P.S.A. in earlier times, it now takes at least two incomes. As the purchasing power of average citizens (i.e. the customers of the cartels) in the P.S.A. decrease, they must find new ways to stretch what little money they make. One of the ways is by filesharing. Another way is by using alternatives (independent entertainment and software) to cartel product. If the cartels are complaining that sales are low, then it it is their own damned fault!

1. If the TV licencing fee is high enough (say about $3000) most people in the P.S.A. will not be able to afford it. This will result in a bunch of unlicenced receivers or the cutting off of the Democrat-Republican party’s brainwashing apparatus (even better). If all of the people switched to the Internet to get their news, chances are that they will become better informed.

I’d have to hear less trash coming out of the family room.
Cons:

1. The citizens will be forced to pay for the licence while (large) corporations will somehow write it off on their income taxes. They play you pay.

2. The government of the P.S.A. will give the money to the same (large) corporations in the form od contracts, etc.

if you look through the bbc new archives, you’ll find articles regarding the online tv downloads.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/3177479.stm

no problem. you just have to know where to search. and i’ve confirmed everything i said with UK friends.

i believe it was also reported on p2pnet, but i’m not sure.

the trial for tv download has stopped, but it should resume in the near future.

when i watch bbc news, it mostly because i can’t stand cnn and also because i’m interested in what’s happening in the UK. cnn doesn’t really cover UK events unless king george is there to feed his lapdog, or there’s a disaster. otherwise, i watch euronews.

Blaggo

Also don’t pay too much attention to the impartiality of BBC news coverage. It’s not as independant as maybe you think and they would like you to believe. You only have to look at their coverage of issues such as “internet piracy” to get an understanding of how biased their reportage really is. Even when reporting on their own internal activities, they can’t tell it straight:

http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2005_08_01_biased-bbc_archive.html#112190325209689973

The Beeb is a government-controlled “independant” [sic] broadcasting corporation and has a history of kow-towing to various governments in the past even though they are evangelical about their independance from political pressure. Gavyn Davies and Greg Dyke both resigned over the Hutton enquiry and the British Government then decided to appoint Michael Grade as the new chairman, who previously held a part-time non-exec position on the Board of Governors.

Anyone who thinks the Beeb is impartial and is not controlled by Government should wake up and smell the coffee! [No offence meant Catflap old bean!] Doesn’t mean to say they don’t produce some brilliant radio programmes though. Long live Wogan!

Blaggo

thanks. you might be in the minority…but i enjoy doing them anyway.

i also have basically divorced myself from most lamenews broadcasts - mostly the ones from CNN, the “Criminal News Network”. but occasionally i watch BBC news and Euronews, which is an independent station.

but anyway, to the topic of this piece…i do sometimes buy a dvd or two, but only when it’s in the bargain bin at a fair, realistic price. i’ve noticed that many new films - mostly the big-name lackluster remakes this past year, have pretty much gone directly into the bargain bins after a very short top-shelf lifespan (a subject covered by me in a future article). that doesn’t mean i’ve bought the remakes - i haven’t. i’m just noting that a large part of the bin contents are the remakes of the past year or two.

i also like collecting series and box-sets of films and tv shows - ones which are classic and/or ones i enjoy a lot and that i feel are worthy of receiving my money. but i just can’t buy all of them. i try to be conscious and aware enough to not let myself be influenced by fancy marketing and packaging - which is what hollywood and madison avenue would like. i’mk glad that many old and new tv shows are being released on dvd, but the price is not fair.

i don’t use the pay-per-view or movie-on-demand services of my cable company. the cost - although lower than a cinema ticket, is still too much. and anyway. i’ve already acquired most of their selection by other means. hey, i already use their phone, tv and internet services. i think i’m paying enough.

Not that i watch much. It probly adds up to an hour per fortnight most months.

actually he can get the other side without actually watching the shows or subscribing to cable, most or all of the news stations have websites where they carry their stories.

thanks, you just answered my question regarding an interest in being aware of alternative viewpoints, whether you think them right or not, unfortunately ouy have now cut yourself off from that very viewpoint by restricting yourself to outlets YOU deem as relevant or ‘right’…hmmmm, keep your friends close and your enemies closer, thats why organizations like ACLU, EFF subscribe to a variety of media (including exorbitantly priced and biased trade publications)….I’m approaching this from desire for knowledge, while you seem to focus on the entertainment aspect of it (hockey comments aside)….but hey, thats just a different opinion….

Different sides of an opinion I like; only I don’t find that on lamescream. The lamescream butters its own side of the bread and leaves the other side wanting. Only through the internet do you get a chance at unbias news. Whose sticking their heads in the sand? Joe Public who gets his dose of “Fair and Balanced” that is anything but fair or balanced?

When a court decided the issue in Flordia over the other side being heard in this “Fair and Balanced” it was ruled that a trade statement didn’t mean they had to support both sides of the issue and the guy lost.

Have you asked yourself, “Why aren’t there any broadcasts dealing with the victims of these financial terror attacks being leashed upon Joe Public” from lamescream? I hear all the time on the net that there isn’t. How is that the other opinion? I hope you see from this one small example what I mean. It is far from the only one and the exposing of varied opinions on broadcast tv is a vast wasteland, notably lacking in both content and consistancy.

Many times small fish are thrown to the viewership to make it appear that it is fair but the big money battles are never thrown as fair fish.

I can understand a rerun because there are folks that just can’t fit into their lives being in front of the tv for the “premere showing”. I can’t understand reruns that last continually for two weeks and on some stations they even run the rerun back to back. If I just watched it, why would I want to watch it again within the very next broadcast? To me that is mindlessness. Those were the last things I recall ever seeing on tv before pulling the subscription plug and starting to save money on something so wasteful as to not be worth funding.

At the time I quit using those prescription services there were prehaps 2 or 3 programs that would inform and interest me within a week to month timespan. The rest was an absolute waste of time.

The BBc just started airing “Rome”, which it co-produced with HBO, and then paid $800,000 per episode for airing rights. through government subsidising and tv licenses, they surely have enough money - and are willing to prove it - by putting their entire archive online for free.

perhaps there should be a mandatory tv license in the states. most countries have one and perhaps it’s about time the USA had one, too. perhaps that would eliminate a lot of the ads, generate a lot of money, and force production companies to create better entertainment and better distribution methods.

i know, this won’t happen. but it could be part of a solution. local PBS stations just aren’t cutting it anymore.

US & UK broadcasters should provide legal download to worldwide IP addresses - but for a reasonable fee per episode. They should also let us burn our newly acquired files to CDs & DVDs if they really want to stop piracy.

The iTunes offer of ‘Lost’ & ‘Desperate Housewives’ will not stop piracy as is. First, it’s available only in the US, when most of the so called pirates are in other areas where the shows won’t air before next year ! Then if we have to pay for it but we can’t burn the files it’s not worth it.

Might as well keep downloading for free.

This business of TV and its decline into the lowest common demonator audience has left me out in the cold. Between the business end that ensures each and every viewer gets their dose of commercials and the poor subject matter that gets worse with the low budgets alloted, it has resulted in my just not caring about what some soap opera from prime time is headed. The only way I know about this “Housewives” title is through the internet. I understand that it has a following but I am not among that number.

You see I am no longer exposed to this subpar stuff. I long ago determined I am wasting my money in paying for subscriptions to programming. Cable and satellite just aren’t worth paying for. It would in my case be more cost effiecent if they would allow paying by viewing instead of paying by the month. I am not interested in low brow reality shows that are anything but reality. I am not interested in soaps. I am not interested in sitcoms. I am not interested in reruns. Take all that out of the daily programming for these paid subscriptions and what are you left with? Not enough that it makes it of any value to me. It does little good to have umpteen hundred channels when they all do the same thing. You can watch it this week and come back two weeks later for the newest installments and releases.

Instead it is the reason I don’t know of this “Housewives” show. Simply I don’t watch tv, don’t pay for worthless subscriptions, and don’t have to invest in new equipment to keep recieving it. Nor am I bombarded within my home with all this crap called commercials. I am also not exposed to the latest greatest piece of trash that is supposed to be the hot new thing. I am a market they aren’t reaching and I am not the only one.

According to an article Jon posted here, major corporations are realising they have missed an important segment of the population. To address that the article made mention of hiring college students to become walking advertisers for them. It seems that much of the younger generation is doing this drop out too. Is this a wave of the future? I have no clue. I do know that today’s programming standards do nothing for me but leave me wishing for less.

they see an opportunity to increase profits while cutting costs, WOW, we can offer an inferior lower cost product and make even more money since our existing rip-off scheme is deteriorating…time to say we are recognizing what our customers want…which now seems to be a poor quality (super tiny), DRM crippled TV show that for ONE EPISODE will cost me approximately 4% of what I pay for an entire months subscription to Rogers Digital TV.

oh oh, sign me up RIGHT NOW!!!!!

TT