BT ordered to block pirate links

On the topic of music piracy - since when did bands make their money from album sales anyway? It's always been from touring (gigs) and merchandising. It's only because of greedy music labels that we have an absurd price of around £10 per album, and then they have the nerve to pretend that the problem isn't them, but their customers?
 
On the topic of music piracy - since when did bands make their money from album sales anyway? It's always been from touring (gigs) and merchandising. It's only because of greedy music labels that we have an absurd price of around £10 per album, and then they have the nerve to pretend that the problem isn't them, but their customers?
Exactly, for a tenner an hour I will allow anyone to use my garage and my £3 Asda microphone, millions of pounds of money wasted on Auto tune saved in a minute.
 
Regardless it would never create enough revenue given that one film can cost £10.

People would still want it free.

They're too fixated on the individual prices of things. They are the type of people who think lowering their prices will definitely result in less income, while ignoring the fact that the lower a price, the more people are likely to buy. It's one of the many reasons that's doing nVidia in really.
 
You and I both know that legitimate users will eventually suffer from the actions taken from actions against pirates, I can't imagine it will be long till Vpn providers will start getting blocked.

I suspect that if there had there been the foresight of the scale of this problem, there would have been much tighter regulation of the internet from day 1 and we would never have got to this point.

to me, whilst not overly palatable, that in itself is a reasonable justification for imposing restrictions. the fact industry organisations and governments have taken so long to act does not in itself make their actions wrong.

I am sure there will be legitimate sites to support legitimate users
 
On the topic of music piracy - since when did bands make their money from album sales anyway? It's always been from touring (gigs) and merchandising. It's only because of greedy music labels that we have an absurd price of around £10 per album, and then they have the nerve to pretend that the problem isn't them, but their customers?

Whether or not it makes them profit directly it contributes towards covering their costs at least.

How is £10 an absurd price for something that can give you 50+ years of entertainment?
 
I suspect that if there had there been the foresight of the scale of this problem, there would have been much tighter regulation of the internet from day 1 and we would never have got to this point.

to me, whilst not overly palatable, that in itself is a reasonable justification for imposing restrictions. the fact industry organisations and governments have taken so long to act does not in itself make their actions wrong.

I am sure there will be legitimate sites to support legitimate users
You can't staff an army of neck-bearded cheap scates, points to the louise boat. Say what you like, tell me when you have got a plan that makes internet censorship easier. What are you going to do and how do you stop encrypted traffic? There is no possible design off the of my head that will even remotely make it possible for widespread internet censorship, p2p communications will always need to exist and encrypted forms obviously can't be censored.
 
Intellectual property holds back innovation and enables the larger companies to retain monopolies as they have more money to pay off the patent office. Some inventors have spent years trying to get patents. While some corporations register several every month.

If everyone can copy other peoples inventions then the value of the invention comes from is the ability of the inventor to make it available at a reasonable price to the consumer. What is an invention that no one ever uses?
 
They're too fixated on the individual prices of things. They are the type of people who think lowering their prices will definitely result in less income, while ignoring the fact that the lower a price, the more people are likely to buy. It's one of the many reasons that's doing nVidia in really.

Simplicity, function and choice are probably more important than price. buying physical media is no longer the simplest option when it comes to music. Not so long ago it would have taken you longer and cost you more to download a few tracks on dial up than to go to the shops and buy them.

Apple are so successful because of the strength of their products simplicity, function and choice. Lack of choice in hardware makes it simple for the consumer to pick the product and then the extensive choice on itunes reaffirms their purchase. Price doesn’t even come into it.
 
Last edited:
You can't staff an army of neck-bearded cheap scates, points to the louise boat. Say what you like, tell me when you have got a plan that makes internet censorship easier. What are you going to do and how do you stop encrypted traffic? There is no possible design off the of my head that will even remotely make it possible for widespread internet censorship, p2p communications will always need to exist and encrypted forms obviously can't be censored.

they can lock it down enough to make it a less palatable choice than the alternative of legitimately downloading or buying a product.

most consumers will take the line of least resistance and lowest risk
 
Whether or not it makes them profit directly it contributes towards covering their costs at least.

How is £10 an absurd price for something that can give you 50+ years of entertainment?

Don't make them out to be 'just scrapping by', they're minted. Between recording, editing and producing CDs they would still be minted if they charged £1 per album.
 
Don't make them out to be 'just scrapping by', they're minted. Between recording, editing and producing CDs they would still be minted if they charged £1 per album.

Who are they? Mainstream pop acts?

For any band, mainstream or otherwise, £1 an album is highly unlikely to cover their costs.
 
Who are they? Mainstream pop acts?

For any band, mainstream or otherwise, £1 an album is highly unlikely to cover their costs.

'They' being the record labels. £1 is easily enough to cover their costs - and as i said before, historically bands have had no trouble making their money from gigs/touring and merchandising.
 
http://www.amazon.com/Against-Intellectual-Property-Stephan-Kinsella/dp/B001DTHFWS book is available online for free.

There is a massive argument against IP and i do not think that most people that argue the case for IP have ever even considered the argument. They are just loud mouth people that that like government enabled monopolies. Their product sucks so much that they have to get legislation from the government to prevent people from making it better.


Lol worthy, ip ensures research and development, not hinders.

Who's going to forkout the estimated $1.3billion cost per successful drug development, when others could just take the drug and sale it with no cost of research and testing.
 
Lol worthy, ip ensures research and development, not hinders.

Who's going to forkout the estimated $1.3billion cost per successful drug development, when others could just take the drug and sale it with no cost of research and testing.

Unfortunately with the current laws drug development is often hindered by patents, varying isomers of the same drug are patented so that companies can keep bringing out the same drug over and over again, and many different drugs in the same class with virtually identical effects are developed as opposed to developing novel drugs.
 
Intellectual property holds back innovation and enables the larger companies to retain monopolies as they have more money to pay off the patent office. Some inventors have spent years trying to get patents. While some corporations register several every month.

If everyone can copy other peoples inventions then the value of the invention comes from is the ability of the inventor to make it available at a reasonable price to the consumer. What is an invention that no one ever uses?

What a load of crap. Joe Bloggs invents a new device. No copyright/patent? Huge Company™ rip it off, make 10,000 of them before Joe Bloggs can finish making the second, and Huge Company™ have loads of profit, Joe Bloggs has nothing.

lolgroen
 
Unfortunately with the current laws drug development is often hindered by patents, varying isomers of the same drug are patented so that companies can keep bringing out the same drug over and over again, and many different drugs in the same class with virtually identical effects are developed as opposed to developing novel drugs.

Well they do do novel drugs, iirc they don't have to do so many trials with existing drugs. Just change of use tests or something like that.

I would rather we have the situation we are in know then no drugs. Who unearth would spend $1.3billion and not be able to recoup a penny.

It's not just drugs though.

Films are now costing $100m+ and games industry costs are skyrocketing as cgi and effects have to become more realistic and with games have to be so much bigger story lines than they used to be.

Why would anyone create them with no IP.
 
Back
Top Bottom