Comments on: European music fans love p2p http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135 p2pnet.net - reader powered Thu, 08 Jan 2009 07:25:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-26987 Reader's Write Mon, 26 Dec 2005 04:13:36 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-26987 "The Organized Music cartel sue 'em all marketing campaign and over-pricing continue to drive music fans in their hundreds of millions away from the corporate music services it supplies into the arms of sites such as allofmp3.com and the p2p networks." AllofMP3 isn't actually illegal. p2p on the other hand is. http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm (See for yourself) “The Organized Music cartel sue ‘em all marketing campaign and over-pricing continue to drive music fans in their hundreds of millions away from the corporate music services it supplies into the arms of sites such as allofmp3.com and the p2p networks.”

AllofMP3 isn’t actually illegal. p2p on the other hand is.

http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm (See for yourself)

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25337 Reader's Write Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:23:53 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25337 You have got to hand it to the BBC for actually replying with an opinionated response, hence they they read your email. Try that with any American corporation and all you'll get is an auto-reply or some empty "corporate safe" garbage a team of lawyers had to approve. You have got to hand it to the BBC for actually replying with an opinionated response, hence they they read your email. Try that with any American corporation and all you’ll get is an auto-reply or some empty “corporate safe” garbage a team of lawyers had to approve.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25334 Reader's Write Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:32:03 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25334 I actually got a reply from them: Many thanks for your email. A couple of points that I hope will answer your e-mail. File-sharing networks such as Kazaa and Grokster are "illegal". Courts in many countries have ruled that they breach copyright by facilitating the exchange of copyrighted material. See these stories for more detail: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4214810.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4416484.stm With regards to individuals while semantically it may be the case that "file-sharing" of copyrighted files is not illegal per se, uploading (i.e. making available copyrighted tracks for file-sharing) most certainly is. The BPI has not taken anyone to court yet as many people have settled out of court and the legal process for those who have not is ongoing. Also thank you for your views on the reasons why legal services have not taken off to the extent of illegal services. As you can see from the stories below we have done a number of pieces on DRM and pricing. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4474143.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4309633.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4194047.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3939263.stm Finally, our investigative reporter is in the process of writing a feature responding to the many emails we have had regarding frustrations over DRM. I hope that helps. Many thanks Darren Waters Senior Broadcast Journalist BBC News website 0208 225 8153 http://news.bbc.co.uk/entertainment I actually got a reply from them:

Many thanks for your email.

A couple of points that I hope will answer your e-mail.

File-sharing networks such as Kazaa and Grokster are “illegal”. Courts in many countries have ruled that they breach copyright by facilitating the exchange of copyrighted material.

See these stories for more detail:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4214810.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4416484.stm

With regards to individuals while semantically it may be the case that “file-sharing” of copyrighted files is not illegal per se, uploading (i.e. making available copyrighted tracks for file-sharing) most certainly is.

The BPI has not taken anyone to court yet as many people have settled out of court and the legal process for those who have not is ongoing.

Also thank you for your views on the reasons why legal services have not taken off to the extent of illegal services. As you can see from the stories below we have done a number of pieces on DRM and pricing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4474143.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4309633.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4194047.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3939263.stm

Finally, our investigative reporter is in the process of writing a feature responding to the many emails we have had regarding frustrations over DRM.

I hope that helps.

Many thanks

Darren Waters
Senior Broadcast Journalist
BBC News website
0208 225 8153
http://news.bbc.co.uk/entertainment

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25304 Reader's Write Tue, 29 Nov 2005 07:12:10 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25304 I'm suprised more people don't do this, who knows, it could have some effect. Go here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint.shtml and you can make a complaint about the news they report. I just have, saying that it is skewed towards the BPI, and that they fail to report how unfair the BPI-endorsed 'legal' stores are, and that the file-sharing networks aren't actually illegal at all. Maybe if more people do this sort of thing it will make some small difference. I’m suprised more people don’t do this, who knows, it could have some effect. Go here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint.shtml
and you can make a complaint about the news they report. I just have, saying that it is skewed towards the BPI, and that they fail to report how unfair the BPI-endorsed ‘legal’ stores are, and that the file-sharing networks aren’t actually illegal at all. Maybe if more people do this sort of thing it will make some small difference.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25286 Reader's Write Tue, 29 Nov 2005 02:00:38 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7135#comment-25286 The cartels have long had their eye on this phenomon of p2p. Wringing their hands and saying, "Oh what are we gonna do? Their stealing our music and we aren't getting paid for our carefully laid plans to rip everyone from one end of the business to the other." They've gone on a diet of laying folks off, of eliminating the middleman so the profits mostly come to them, but the head knockers are still there and the lawyers are some of the most used and contracted companies they employ. After deciding that sueing everyone in sight and pushing to change laws in every country to support their stance, still no one is coming to buy in the masses they were. Cookie cutter tunes and artists that are no longer truely musicans have done nothing to increase sales. Nor has DRM done anything to increase customer satisfaction. In the face of all other business models, the cartels still believe that limiting access to data in the form of song, on a media where unlimited data is the rule, have yet to figure out that limiting the data isn't bringing home the bacon like it used to. Sueing people isn't bringing them in either. Nor are the likes of Sony's rootkit encouraging those potential customers to return and buy again. Treating their customers as criminal by locking down the product and raising prices on those products does nothing to increase customer base. Simply the buying and owning experience has be negated by unsatisfied customer expectations for the products. One that the cartels themselves set into place early in the business years and now want to change to meet their views of what a money returning product would be if they had their druthers. What the cartels haven't put together is that unsatisfied customers equals customers going elsewhere. No amount of demanding is going to equal more sales on a product that doesn't meet customer expectations. A cd that won't play in my cd player in my car isn't a product I want to buy. Jumping through hoops to get it that way isn't what I expect if I buy and there is no reason to spend money on a product that doesn't meet my life style requirements. Nor is anticopy meeting the simple invisible passthrough that customers expect if it is going to be included in music to be bought. It is the exact opposite in function of what is required by people that buy music. If the cartels can't understand that then the result is continually shrinking sales as those customers get the satisfaction elsewhere without the cartels. The dinosaurs are slowly getting the message. The people don't need them; it's the other way around. When they realise this, get off their high horse, and meet those demands then maybe whatever is left of the music industry will survive. So far it looks like the dinosaur has a deathly fever and isn't getting better. The cartels have long had their eye on this phenomon of p2p. Wringing their hands and saying, “Oh what are we gonna do? Their stealing our music and we aren’t getting paid for our carefully laid plans to rip everyone from one end of the business to the other.”

They’ve gone on a diet of laying folks off, of eliminating the middleman so the profits mostly come to them, but the head knockers are still there and the lawyers are some of the most used and contracted companies they employ. After deciding that sueing everyone in sight and pushing to change laws in every country to support their stance, still no one is coming to buy in the masses they were. Cookie cutter tunes and artists that are no longer truely musicans have done nothing to increase sales. Nor has DRM done anything to increase customer satisfaction.

In the face of all other business models, the cartels still believe that limiting access to data in the form of song, on a media where unlimited data is the rule, have yet to figure out that limiting the data isn’t bringing home the bacon like it used to. Sueing people isn’t bringing them in either. Nor are the likes of Sony’s rootkit encouraging those potential customers to return and buy again. Treating their customers as criminal by locking down the product and raising prices on those products does nothing to increase customer base. Simply the buying and owning experience has be negated by unsatisfied customer expectations for the products. One that the cartels themselves set into place early in the business years and now want to change to meet their views of what a money returning product would be if they had their druthers.

What the cartels haven’t put together is that unsatisfied customers equals customers going elsewhere. No amount of demanding is going to equal more sales on a product that doesn’t meet customer expectations. A cd that won’t play in my cd player in my car isn’t a product I want to buy. Jumping through hoops to get it that way isn’t what I expect if I buy and there is no reason to spend money on a product that doesn’t meet my life style requirements. Nor is anticopy meeting the simple invisible passthrough that customers expect if it is going to be included in music to be bought. It is the exact opposite in function of what is required by people that buy music. If the cartels can’t understand that then the result is continually shrinking sales as those customers get the satisfaction elsewhere without the cartels.

The dinosaurs are slowly getting the message. The people don’t need them; it’s the other way around. When they realise this, get off their high horse, and meet those demands then maybe whatever is left of the music industry will survive. So far it looks like the dinosaur has a deathly fever and isn’t getting better.

]]>