Nope. The leaked norty version that people got did have DRM which caused outcry among the geeks. But apparently the 'proper' release has no DRM whatsoever.
Piracy costing tens of billions of pounds
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
Nope. The leaked norty version that people got did have DRM which caused outcry among the geeks. But apparently the 'proper' release has no DRM whatsoever.
It's a little wonder that piracy is costing so much. As long as big companies are willing to stump up multi-million pound ransoms to get their ships and crew back it won't change. Sink their ships and lob a couple of Tomahawks and a few well placed 5" shells into their base of operations and things might then start to change.
oo when's it out proper?
I might actually pick this up
*Hands man card back in*
End of next week iirc.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=22952
Exactly, and we are back to the stone age record/film companies...
As for Pandora someone got my hopes up, I used to use it all the time and thought that they had removed the "only in the US" clause again, seems not...
It's really sad though as the kids of today are growing up with this sound and actually prefer it so there are what could be some real gems out there ruined by bad production values which will never be put right as no one will care. The first Artic Monkeys album is a striking example of terrible sound engineering that still sells by the bucket load.
As for the piracy debate I've given up on it, I will continue to buy as much of my music and as many of my films as I can within reason purely because I feel it is the right thing to do and others won't as they don't. Despite all the arguments and justifications for both sides it is as simple as that.
Last edited:
...Jews can't be Pirates! Of course.
Exactly, and we are back to the stone age record/film companies...
As for Pandora someone got my hopes up, I used to use it all the time and thought that they had removed the "only in the US" clause again, seems not...
Haha sorry, it was just an example. The other two work though. The only issue I have with Spotify is the 'radio' which works similarly to Pandora just much worse. Bon Jovi is not metal
Permabanned
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 3,762
- Location
- My fabulous ship
Lysander... magick just owned you. And Im being serious too lol.
First of all we are in a digital age. We use mp3 players, streaming music over physical file storage like cds.
Second of all, a full duplex sound card and a run of the mill pc can do more than you think. Look at daniel beddingfield for example.
Then there's the whole creating a cover???? **eheeeeeeemmmmmmm** lol
And distribution? really? mp3.com? reverbnation? just off the top of my head.
I thought the first Arctic Monkeys album was done in their bedroom by themselves, which is why people put up with it, as it was a first?
Haha sorry, it was just an example. The other two work though. The only issue I have with Spotify is the 'radio' which works similarly to Pandora just much worse. Bon Jovi is not metal
*glares*
Teenage, tin-eared listeners may want mp3s but I know of no professional band that would be happy having their music mastered purely in mp3 format or compared to Daniel Beddingfield in any way whatsoever. Don't be ridiculous. You know what perfectionists artists can be?
Bands are generally very very picky when it comes to their artwork. They want something specific done in a professional manner and normally have a huge brief for the artist to follow. This can take weeks/months of negotiation until the final product has been tweaked enough to the satisfaction of all parties. I'm talking about these things from experience and it's no way as simple as you're making out.
Last edited:
This.
As an interesting statistic, when Sweden (I think) finally made copyright infringement illegal, internet traffic dropped 30% overnight.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 11,701
- Location
- Cheshire
Presumeably they've worked out how much its costing the industry and or the economy by averaging downloader numbers versus number of files downloaded. But in actual fact its a load of ****, because if those people actually HAD to pay for the items, they wouldnt use/watch/listen to them, so they havent lost anything. I'd be willing to bet that with the advent of being able to buy legitimate downloads cheaply the actual cost is smaller than ever before. Not to mention that with programs like Napster starting illegal but turning legitimate, piracy has actually helped sales in the long run!
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 718
The tin-eared listeners that you refer to just so happen to be the majority of consumers. Just because certain people would like full quality music on a CD does not mean that everyone else does. Why is your need any greater than theirs?
Ideally the two systems would be run side by side, catering for both those who want a quick copy to shove on their MP3 player AND those who wish to play CDs through expensive sound systems. Whether or not that happens is up to the record companies but the suggestions are out there.
Unfortunately the 'certain people' you refer to are the most important people - the bands - who care about their music more than the consumers and don't want their creations to have 90% of their audio quality torn out.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 11,742
- Location
- Northern Ireland
Do what he suggested an store it in a Lossless format then. Problem solved.
Hell, its what the studio will be doing anyway.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 718
I'm afraid the bands would have less say if people stopped buying their 'expensive' music and took to cheaper MP3-based solutions.
I'm not saying that bands should be forced to do anything but I believe their labels should have enough sense to realise what consumers want these days, whether that be the needs of the audiophiles or the Average Joes.
Indeed. I did some freelance graphics work a while ago creating an album cover, and it tooks weeks of drafts being banded about for them to decide on minute changes (although they didn't notice a typo for about 4 drafts
).They do. I do. I've heard the pleas of scores of listeners saying "we want physical CDs and instant downloads if we spend our money." Fine. "We want posters with our CDs." Fine. "We want something physical in the box." Fine. "We want special edition vinyls." Fine. "We want a printed guarantee in the CD inlay saying that x% goes to the band". Fine. "We want 320 kbps mp3s". Fine.
But all this is superfulous. At the end of day loads of people are going to download it and not pay instead. The bottom line is that if people can get something for free, they will, end of story.
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 718
Nobody is denying that there are some people who will not think twice about downloading things for free despite being offered reasonable alternatives. Saying that everyone is the same, however, is simply not true (which some people like stoofa cannot seem to understand).