|
|
|
186
 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 30/07/2008 10:11:34
Posts: 2,
Visits: 6
|
|
I read the article Viacom Google by Mark in the latest Micromart.
An excellent view of the current case between them and very well written.
However, one thing that isn't mentioned in the article is the things that viacom wanted to get hold of that the judge didn't allow.
I gave a quick laymans look to the court results and found it very interesting that viacom were trying to get their hands on the backend code for you tube along with the search code. It was claimed that this was needed to find out if youtube were trying hard enough to remove copyright material?
Once you have this it would save a lot of cash if you wanted to set up your own version. Of course Viacom as a respecter of copyright would not do this (Sorry couldn't type that with a straight face)
Given that there are a lot of rumours of Viacom sniffing around various social networking sites it does make you wonder.
If I were a cynic I might think that this was a legalized smash and grab raid to get at the code and mess up the competition in the process.
Of course a company such as Viacom would not stoop to such levels.
Another couple of things occurred to me when reading the results.
The first is that viacom asked for all deleted videos from youtube. The judge failed to specify that they could only have copies of their own material. This would mean that if the deleted material contained videos with copyright which did not belong to viacom, then viacom would be committing copyright theft by being in possession of the material. The judge could also be in the frame for facilitating copyright theft.
By asking for and been granted the list of all users instead of all users who accessed viacom copyright material. Both viacom and the judge have left themselves open potential legal actions from those users who did not access the copyright material as this sort of invasion of privacy breaks several laws both in europe and the states.
The fallout from this could get very interesting and given that the Eu is already taking an interest in this case it my be a good idea for the viacom bosses and the judge to postpone any european holidays for the forseeable future.
|
|
|
|
|
286
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 00:35:26
Posts: 436,
Visits: 11,236
|
|
I think the Radiohead/Prince box-out was very interesting indeed. Radiohead clearly understand the value of the internet and recognise that record companies are still pushing an outdated business model. As Thom said: "I like the people at our record company, but the time is at hand when you have to ask why anyone needs one. And, yes, it probably would give us some perverse pleasure to say 'F*** you' to this decaying business model." Following this, they went on to ask punters what they would like to pay for the album via download and 1.2 million people paid something for the album, rumoured to be circa £4 on average. I guess they would be fairly happy with that, as they produced the album themselves and I expect it increased the exposure to new potential fans greatly. They can then make the vast amount of their money from live performances.
Prince however is not in the same league as Radiohead and although he gave away an album in the newspaper, I expect that if he decided to ask what people would pay for it, the answer may have been a little sobering for him. Most would probably ask to be paid to listen to it.
There is no hiding place for rubbish bands anymore, and certainly no hiding place for record companies. They can continue to slap DRM on music and bitch and moan about illegal downloaders, but they will never change anything, the world has moved on. Illegal downloads are now a fact of life, there will always be a way around it, and it is now the record companies decision, ultimately. They either stop producing music, or they find decent bands and new ways to extract money off people for box-sets and bonus material, improved quality and bit-rates, live performances? They cannot expect to sell a CD for £15 of some Pop Idol no-mark covering/murdering decent songs. Either way, once a song has found it's way on to one persons hard disk, you are never going to stop piracy. People say that it has always been this way, but I think now differs a lot, because there is little degradation of quality from an illegal download. The record companies need to try to impress upon people that music is an investment, and that a download should be treated as a preview. If you like your illegal download, go and buy the album so you have a hard copy. But the days of large volumes of £15 CD's is long gone and ain't coming back. I have been "previewing" music for years and many bands have got a CD sale from me, as I have "previewed" the tracks first. I have a very expensive HiFi and music is very dear to me, so I guess, that is what makes me go out and buy a CD and others will live with the download. But £15 is getting hard to swallow for me now.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Desktop
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.1ghz, Asus P5KPL Motherboard, 2 x 2GB DDR2 800mhz G-Skill RAM @ 5 - 5 - 5 - 15, Asus EAH3650 Graphics Card, 250GB SATA2 Hitachi Deskstar, 120GB IDE Maxtor, 36GB SATA WD Raptor, NEC Optiarc 20x DVD-RW, 425w Hiper PSU, Xerox XA7-19i 19” LCD Monitor, Microsoft SideWinder Mouse, 1 x BT HomeHub & 1 x BT HomeHub (Repeater). Vista Home Premium x64.
Lappy
HP Compaq - NX6325 Laptop, AMD Turion 64 x2 TL-52 @ 1.6ghz, 2 x 512MB DDR2 667mhz, ATI Radeon Express 1150 Graphics, 15” LCD Screen, XP Pro SP2.
& a Nokia E61 for sofa surfing!
____________________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
Penryn QX9650 @ 5GHz
Group: Moderators
Last Login: Today @ 21:39:37
Posts: 10,078,
Visits: 12,864
|
|
I'm not sure where you get £15 from. Most albums can be bought for under a tenner from numerous places (online).
Classic PCs
Original IBM PC (4.77MHz 8088, 256KB RAM, monochrome) · Original IBM PC XT (4.77MHz 8088, 512KB, 10MB HDD, monochrome) · Original Compaq Deskpro (7.14MHz 8086, 640KB, 20MB HDD, CGA graphics)
Home Computers
Commodore VIC-20 · C64 original · C64 Terminator edition · C16 · Amiga 500 · Amiga 600 · Amiga 600 HD · Amiga 1200 Acorn Electron · A3010 (Archimedes) · A4000 (Archimedes) Others Sinclair ZX Spectrum 48K · Dragon 32
Consoles
Nintendo Wii · GameCube purple (x 2) · GameCube black · N64 black (x 2) · N64 clear blue · SNES (x 2) · NES (x 2) · DS silver (x 3) · GBA SP silver · GBA purple · GBA clear · Game Boy Color clear · Game Boy Sega Dreamcast x 3 · Saturn · Mega Drive II · Mega Drive · Master System Atari 10-in-1 · Jaguar (x 2) · 7800 · 2600 wood-grain Microsoft Xbox 360 · Xbox Others Mattel Intellivision · MB Vectrex · GoldStar 3DO · Sony PlayStation (original)
|
|
|
|
|
286
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 00:35:26
Posts: 436,
Visits: 11,236
|
|
Find me Pink Floyd - The Wall for under a tenner from a UK online retailer then. I only listen to decent music Jason. I am sure you can get Gareth Gates for under a tenner....but who would bother?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Desktop
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.1ghz, Asus P5KPL Motherboard, 2 x 2GB DDR2 800mhz G-Skill RAM @ 5 - 5 - 5 - 15, Asus EAH3650 Graphics Card, 250GB SATA2 Hitachi Deskstar, 120GB IDE Maxtor, 36GB SATA WD Raptor, NEC Optiarc 20x DVD-RW, 425w Hiper PSU, Xerox XA7-19i 19” LCD Monitor, Microsoft SideWinder Mouse, 1 x BT HomeHub & 1 x BT HomeHub (Repeater). Vista Home Premium x64.
Lappy
HP Compaq - NX6325 Laptop, AMD Turion 64 x2 TL-52 @ 1.6ghz, 2 x 512MB DDR2 667mhz, ATI Radeon Express 1150 Graphics, 15” LCD Screen, XP Pro SP2.
& a Nokia E61 for sofa surfing!
____________________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 22:14:53
Posts: 1,793,
Visits: 7,656
|
|
Like this one?  Pre release addmitedly. Edit. Go here and use the first voucher. Then search for Pink Floyd The Wall, and you should find that it's £10.49.
Please use tinyurl to reduce the size of links.
It makes a huge difference to those of us with tiny screens.
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 22:01:23
Posts: 7,696,
Visits: 13,791
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 22:14:53
Posts: 1,793,
Visits: 7,656
|
|
Slipstreem (30/07/2008)
So Mitch was right then. You couldn't find it for under a tenner. Cheers, Slipstreem.  Last time I looked £9.89 was less than a tenner. Nobody mentioned anything about having to be in stock.
Please use tinyurl to reduce the size of links.
It makes a huge difference to those of us with tiny screens.
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 22:01:23
Posts: 7,696,
Visits: 13,791
|
|
|
| |