Bono Calls for Tougher Download Controls

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
U2’s lead singer Bono wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times with his own top ten list of things he feels can change the world. One of those things are tougher protections for Intellectual Property. Check it out (it’s about a third of the way down the article under the header “Intellectual Property Developers”) and sound off on what you think.

A decade’s worth of music file-sharing and swiping has made clear that the people it hurts are the creators — in this case, the young, fledgling songwriters who can’t live off ticket and T-shirt sales like the least sympathetic among us — and the people this reverse Robin Hooding benefits are rich service providers, whose swollen profits perfectly mirror the lost receipts of the music business.
Click to expand...
 
Speaking as an actual Irish man I'd love it if Bono actually bothered to pay his fucking taxes.
Yeah thats right, Bono the Irish humanitarian dodges paying taxes to his own damn country.
 
So go after RIAA who's pocketing yours and the young songwriters' money, Bono.
 
Even skimming that article makes my head hurt. It's just the ramblings of a fucking idiot. The wrong Bono got offed. Seriously, all this guy does is bitch and moan.
 
people have been making music, movies, art in general for thousands of years without getting paid, and honestly, i wouldnt shed a tear if the entire mass entertainment industry was completely wiped out by the internet, most of that is put out by them sucks anyway...

the music industry should be happy its model of business worked for as long as it did, now that it is obsolete, I say let them go out of business, maybe then they will actually spend their lives contributing to world progress in other, more concrete ways, and let the work of artists be done by.... artists....
 
Looks like Bono struck a nerve with some people who think everything should be online and free. Frankly I am quite surprised he knows as much as he does. I still remember him from his early days when he wore a Mullet. He is absolutely right in that the only thing holding back movie piracy right now is bandwidth.
 
JUSTJOEL73 said:
Looks like Bono struck a nerve with some people who think everything should be online and free. Frankly I am quite surprised he knows as much as he does. I still remember him from his early days when he wore a Mullet. He is absolutely right in that the only thing holding back movie piracy right now is bandwidth.
Click to expand...

He didn't strike a nerve the way you described it. He struck a nerve by blaming only the consumers and not other faults, such as the thieving RIAA and the outdated marketing and business models. Pirates are only one part of the equation, but pirating will only get worse until the other side take the initiative and improve their industry.

Bono used to be all about revolution and the fight against the government and Big Brother. I guess being a millionaire makes it all okay.
 
JUSTJOEL73 said:
Looks like Bono struck a nerve with some people who think everything should be online and free. Frankly I am quite surprised he knows as much as he does. I still remember him from his early days when he wore a Mullet. He is absolutely right in that the only thing holding back movie piracy right now is bandwidth.
Click to expand...

No, Bono struck a nerve with anyone with a functioning brain. The music industry needs to adapt with the times or die. That is simply the way it is. If they can't find better ways to sell music the way people want it (digitally, high quality, DRM free, fairly priced) then they deserve to die off. No two ways about it. Same with the movie industry. The game industry seems to be the only ones capable of understanding this and able to actually make the correct changes.
 
Bono's like all the other shitheads who pick a subject that is controversial. Bono doesn't speak out against the industry that made him a millionaire. He should be putting on benefit concerts for all the musicians that came out before him from the start of the rock era, 50s and sixties whose music is being played today and are not collecting any royalties because the industry doesn't give s shit about anyone other then themselves and signed contracts to that effect. The Industry is sure quick to extend copyright for themselves but not for the people whose talent made them wealthy beyond belief. Bono I got something you can suck, but I think my dog would bite you, before you got close enough.
 
Derangel said:
find better ways to sell music the way people want it (digitally, high quality, DRM free, fairly priced)
Click to expand...

And who determines the value or price of a creative work?

You? lol... right. So you don't like the price, the format, or how you have to get it, but you want to download it anyways? lol. Sounds like someone else needs to rethink it.

Personally, I agree with the original message that the current business model needs to change with the times. I also think that RIAA suing consumers was a bad pr move, even though it is a correct legal move.

Now that storage, bandwidth, and lossless compression have caught up, I believe that digital sales will increase 2 fold every year for the next 10 years. With that said, I agree that people will pirate an equivalent amount of music/media.

I believe sales will revert back to value added physical merchandise. Like a 2GB flash drive sold for $20, but will contain high res (24bit) wav files, logos, coupons for future events, and other cool stuff. Trent Reznor started the trend of providing more value, and I think all future project artists should try follow his lead.
 
djgizmo said:
And who determines the value or price of a creative work?

You? lol... right. So you don't like the price, the format, or how you have to get it, but you want to download it anyways? lol. Sounds like someone else needs to rethink it.

Personally, I agree with the original message that the current business model needs to change with the times. I also think that RIAA suing consumers was a bad pr move, even though it is a correct legal move.

Now that storage, bandwidth, and lossless compression have caught up, I believe that digital sales will increase 2 fold every year for the next 10 years. With that said, I agree that people will pirate an equivalent amount of music/media.

I believe sales will revert back to value added physical merchandise. Like a 2GB flash drive sold for $20, but will contain high res (24bit) wav files, logos, coupons for future events, and other cool stuff. Trent Reznor started the trend of providing more value, and I think all future project artists should try follow his lead.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about me downloading it anyway? Why are you putting words in my mouth? I stated my opinion clearly and without hidden meanings, please don't try to pull bullshit from between my words.
 
Bono needs to stick to his area of expertise making music instead of being a rambling idiot talking about complex issues he doesn't understand. He forgets that record companies colluded behind the scenes and violated antitrust laws to artificially increase the price of all music. He didn't mention that they resisted any type of digital distribution. He forgets that a ridiculously small percentage of record revenue actually goes to artists, probably something like 5%.

Record companies are dinosaurs that are no longer needed and will eventually be bankrupt. Artists can distribute music on their own and reap much larger profits without middle men leeching from them and resisting technological advancement.
 
djgizmo said:
And who determines the value or price of a creative work?

You? lol... right. So you don't like the price, the format, or how you have to get it, but you want to download it anyways? lol. Sounds like someone else needs to rethink it.
Click to expand...

seems you need a lesson in Free Market Capitalism
it is US THAT IN FACT DO SET THE PRICE
the market will only pay what it thinks is far if its not far people wont buy and if there is other means of getting what they want ... well you see how that works

change or die
 
It's funny how it's always the filthy rich, world famous artists that show sympathy for those poor, fledging new artists.

Not that it matters any more. I stopped both buying CD's and downloading music when I got Spotify.
 
I'll be damned if I'll read any of the drivel that spews forth from "Bono." Just wanted to say Bono is one of a select few people I truly hate. Don't even know WHY I hate him, but every time I hear his name I just think "douchebag."

I'm sure whatever he wrote is profoundly stupid.
 
Terry Olaes said:
U2’s lead singer Bono wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times with his own top ten list of things he feels can change the world. One of those things are tougher protections for Intellectual Property. Check it out (it’s about a third of the way down the article under the header “Intellectual Property Developers”) and sound off on what you think.
Click to expand...

What a selfish bastard. There's an intrinsic reason why people don't care about stealing "intellectual property."

He had an opportunity to show people that he's not just a greedy bastard, but I guess he couldn't help himself.
 
First off. This was written by Bono, who moved his entire business out of Ireland to the Netherlands to not pay taxes. Greedy self-righteous corporate sellout.

Second he is suggesting that ISP's profits are only the result of their customers downloading copyrighted content and he even has the audacity of comparing downloaders to child pornographers that need to be monitored and stopped by the government. The worst statement is using China's fascist persecution of dissidents as an example to follow. Great job there Bono.

The fact is, tracking downloads has always been possible but we have something called due process and the Fourth Amendment. Mark my words. This is only the start of a big push by corporate monopoly rent collecting middlemen for new copyright enforcement laws designed to assume everyone is a criminal and levy a tax on all internet connections to stuff the pockets of these people, much in the same way Canadians pay a tax on blank media to subsidize the monopolies of their media industry.

Bono should just stick to writing hit lyrics like this: “Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeahhhh!”
 
Soon when Bono publishes a book and it get's pirated he'll write an op ed piece on book piracy.

Ebook piracy is going to be the next big thing. Amazon is selling an ebook for slightly less then an actual book. WTF Amazon a book should now only cost $5 max if you're only going to give me a copy you could duplicate at whim.
 
djgizmo said:
And who determines the value or price of a creative work?

You? lol... right. So you don't like the price, the format, or how you have to get it, but you want to download it anyways? lol. Sounds like someone else needs to rethink it.
Click to expand...
A good is only as valuable as much as someone will pay. When there's no demand, the supplier must adjust or go out of business.

Quite simply, the consumer determines the value of something, so yes, we do determine what the value is.
 
Derangel said:
No, Bono struck a nerve with anyone with a functioning brain. The music industry needs to adapt with the times or die. That is simply the way it is. If they can't find better ways to sell music the way people want it (digitally, high quality, DRM free, fairly priced) then they deserve to die off. No two ways about it. Same with the movie industry. The game industry seems to be the only ones capable of understanding this and able to actually make the correct changes.
Click to expand...

Amen to that. Valve's Steam, Direct2drive and other services alike, while not perfect, do deliver what customers want.
 
From Bono(r):perhaps movie moguls will succeed where musicians and their moguls have failed so far, and rally America to defend the most creative economy in the world, where music, film, TV and video games help to account for nearly 4 percent of gross domestic product.
Click to expand...

Funny how he fails to mention what percentage of GDP is comprised of the sales of all the fucking gizmos we buy to attain/play/listen to/watch, said pirated shit. Which is really what 99 percent of it is anyway...a steaming, stinking, pompous, self-righteous, self-important pile of shit. BTW, Bono, I'm now listening to my Robin Hooded version of "Staring at the Sun". Now, I'm not really sure if you're the only one 'Staring at the Sun', but if you are, you really should cut it out. It's clouding your judgement- of me....
 
uhhh he point is completely off the mark. I have a number of friends in bands and the universal statement I get is that low key bands make the majority off shows and merch, cd's are just to get your name out there. I think it goes without saying that he's bias as it would be the opposite for him.
 
Lorien said:
Amen to that. Valve's Steam, Direct2drive and other services alike, while not perfect, do deliver what customers want.
Click to expand...

I agree Steam is awesome! When they have sales the price is just right.
 
Derangel said:
No, Bono struck a nerve with anyone with a functioning brain. The music industry needs to adapt with the times or die. That is simply the way it is. If they can't find better ways to sell music the way people want it (digitally, high quality, DRM free, fairly priced) then they deserve to die off. No two ways about it. Same with the movie industry. The game industry seems to be the only ones capable of understanding this and able to actually make the correct changes.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Value is determined by what people are willing to pay, not what the creator thinks its worth. I have a pile of shit I think is worth $100,000, doesn't mean I'm gonna get anything for it....

The gaming industry is getting it right. Steam is the best example. Their current holiday sale has moved so many games, sure, they're going for $5-10 but thats sales that aren't going to piracy, or simply people not buying. I haven't bought 1 overpriced music CD, or movie this holiday season. I've made about 7 purchases on steam since the sale started.

The entire movie/music industry needs to stop blaming everyone and actually realize that their products aren't valued by people as highly anymore, and adjust their business practices. You don't win customers by sueing and invading privacy, you win them by offering a good product at a price they like.
 
dopexile said:
Bono needs to stick to his area of expertise making music instead of being a rambling idiot talking about complex issues he doesn't understand. He forgets that record companies colluded behind the scenes and violated antitrust laws to artificially increase the price of all music. He didn't mention that they resisted any type of digital distribution. He forgets that a ridiculously small percentage of record revenue actually goes to artists, probably something like 5%.

Record companies are dinosaurs that are no longer needed and will eventually be bankrupt. Artists can distribute music on their own and reap much larger profits without middle men leeching from them and resisting technological advancement.
Click to expand...

And what makes you an expert? How many artists make it on a national stage without the marketing power of a label? NIN and Radiohead don't count, because they already had a big brand name.

I don't agree with Bono about charging people for music via their ISP, but there's little evidence that you can sell millions of albums without some serious marketing, and he's right that this will hurt artists.

The Beatles would not have achieved what they achieved without a Label. Neither would the Stones, Zep, REM, Nivana, Pearl Jam, MJB, Prince, Michael Jackson, Rush, Yes or Pink Floyd.
Some might have made a living in music, but they would not have sold the millions of albums and likely wouldn't have created their most well known works.

And last time i checked, music has sold for the same or less than it did 5 years earlier at almost any point in time in the last 40 years.

CD's have generally sold for under $14.00 for 15 years (or more). If that's too much for you, then I'm unsure how you managed to buy the computer you're typing on, much less the OS you use and the games that you play, which all cost far more than a CD.
 
demingo said:
Exactly. Value is determined by what people are willing to pay, not what the creator thinks its worth. I have a pile of shit I think is worth $100,000, doesn't mean I'm gonna get anything for it....

The gaming industry is getting it right. Steam is the best example. Their current holiday sale has moved so many games, sure, they're going for $5-10 but thats sales that aren't going to piracy, or simply people not buying. I haven't bought 1 overpriced music CD, or movie this holiday season. I've made about 7 purchases on steam since the sale started.

The entire movie/music industry needs to stop blaming everyone and actually realize that their products aren't valued by people as highly anymore, and adjust their business practices. You don't win customers by sueing and invading privacy, you win them by offering a good product at a price they like.
Click to expand...

You're right, but if I want 100k for my pile of shit, then that's the price. Look, if the prices were much higher than typical prices, I'd give your argument greater consideration, but music is cheaper now than it was 5 years ago. 5 years ago, it was cheaper than it was 10 years before that and it was cheaper then than it was 10 years prior to that.

Steam is selling mostly old games for low prices....and they, or the content providers, decided what to sell those games for. For all we know, those games are sold at a loss, due to excess key inventory. I can buy relatively new releases 9as well as Older releases, on BMG's site for 5 - 7 bucks shipped. If that's too much for you, then there's really no price that low enough for you, other than free.
 
nilepez said:
And what makes you an expert? How many artists make it on a national stage without the marketing power of a label? NIN and Radiohead don't count, because they already had a big brand name.

I don't agree with Bono about charging people for music via their ISP, but there's little evidence that you can sell millions of albums without some serious marketing, and he's right that this will hurt artists.

The Beatles would not have achieved what they achieved without a Label. Neither would the Stones, Zep, REM, Nivana, Pearl Jam, MJB, Prince, Michael Jackson, Rush, Yes or Pink Floyd.
Some might have made a living in music, but they would not have sold the millions of albums and likely wouldn't have created their most well known works.

And last time i checked, music has sold for the same or less than it did 5 years earlier at almost any point in time in the last 40 years.

CD's have generally sold for under $14.00 for 15 years (or more). If that's too much for you, then I'm unsure how you managed to buy the computer you're typing on, much less the OS you use and the games that you play, which all cost far more than a CD.
Click to expand...

QFT.

Furthermore, "free" for IP is going to kill one of the few manufactured exports the US actually has, the film business, if it gets out of control. He's correct in that bandwidth is the only thing keeping it from happening on the same level that it has with music.

Now I eagerly await the idiotic posts I've seen here and everywhere else time and time again that actually defends piracy. :rolleyes:

Lorien said:
Amen to that. Valve's Steam, Direct2drive and other services alike, while not perfect, do deliver what customers want.
Click to expand...

Steam is great, I absolutely love it and refuse to buy a PC game unless I can download it from them or GOG, but the thing to keep in mind is that it serves as a form of DRM. If any of the music services had DRM that was as restrictive you would hear a lot of complaining (and we did!).

Music services like iTunes and Amazon actually did one better than Steam by completely doing away with DRM. I don't ever expect this to happen with Steam. It is more palatable with them since they offer additional services like downloading to wherever you are and autopatching. Thing is that these are things you don't really need with movies and music. Short of ISP's policing their traffic (as Bono suggested in the article), I don't know what can be done.
 
nilepez said:
You're right, but if I want 100k for my pile of shit, then that's the price. Look, if the prices were much higher than typical prices, I'd give your argument greater consideration, but music is cheaper now than it was 5 years ago. 5 years ago, it was cheaper than it was 10 years before that and it was cheaper then than it was 10 years prior to that.

Steam is selling mostly old games for low prices....and they, or the content providers, decided what to sell those games for. For all we know, those games are sold at a loss, due to excess key inventory. I can buy relatively new releases 9as well as Older releases, on BMG's site for 5 - 7 bucks shipped. If that's too much for you, then there's really no price that low enough for you, other than free.
Click to expand...

Yup. On top of that, adjusted for inflation, even at $60 games are cheaper than they've ever been. Consider that in the 80s through the mid-2000s, games were $50. Hell, games on the Wii are still $50. Wait a few months and those $60 games plummet in price to $20-$40.

People will still complain though, and a fraction of that will feel entitled and justified to download it for free.
 
Short of ISP's policing their traffic (as Bono suggested in the article), I don't know what can be done.
Click to expand...

Effectively, nothing, which is why people should ALWAYS be more concerned with sales numbers than piracy numbers. I mean really, with Avatar pulling in this much money, does anyone expect the film to be pirated less than other films? I'd be surprised if it wasn't the *most* pirated film of the year. If you want to stop piracy, you'll have to stop producing digital media. On the other hand if all you want to do is make money(apparently, even if all you want to do is make BILLIONS OF DOLLARS), is produce something people will pay money to see/experience.
 
Spewn said:
Effectively, nothing, which is why people should ALWAYS be more concerned with sales numbers than piracy numbers. I mean really, with Avatar pulling in this much money, does anyone expect the film to be pirated less than other films? I'd be surprised if it wasn't the *most* pirated film of the year. If you want to stop piracy, you'll have to stop producing digital media. On the other hand if all you want to do is make money(apparently, even if all you want to do is make BILLIONS OF DOLLARS), is produce something people will pay money to see/experience.
Click to expand...

Avatar did something very smart, in that it was made in 3D and marketed as a movie that you absolutely need to see in the theater and not at home. Word of mouth is only confirming that to people that have yet to see it. Hell, I've heard several times from people that they will be watching it a bunch of times in the theater and passing on it on Blu Ray. Maybe they'll change their minds when 3D Blu Ray comes out, I dunno. Either way, the presentation makes the normal way of viewing a movie (which the current format pirates operate in) less appealing, which increases ticket sales.

If there's something Cameron is good at, its appealing to a very wide audience and getting them to do repeat viewing in the theater.
 
Do people actually pirate Indie music? If anything I'd think the young, fledgeling song writers are the ones who are most likely to get their physical albums bought. I'd honestly say I'd pay $25 right now for a pressed Andrew Jackson Jihad CD, which probably amounts to like 15 minutes of music.

Weird that I wouldn't pay 9 dollars for U2 MP3's, or $10 for their physical album. Actually don't think I'd entertain the idea of pirating a U2 album either...

Okay, maybe not everyone's a hipster fag like me, but still, I'd think people would honestly be more inclined to pay for music that's not so mainstream.

I honestly believe that retail distributers are the ones having problems moving products now. If I ran a record store I'd probably only keep three copies of every CD in stock.
 
The Beatles would not have achieved what they achieved without a Label. Neither would the Stones, Zep, REM, Nivana, Pearl Jam, MJB, Prince, Michael Jackson, Rush, Yes or Pink Floyd.
Click to expand...

First of all, So What. I can live just fine without any of 'em.

Second of all, back then everything was on vinyl and needed a massive distribution chain to get it out there and onto a phonograph.

Third of all, those were the days when you could pretty much count on the whole album being good. Not so much these days.

Fourth, and finally, a true 'Artist' doesn't really need a label.

You see, you left out some less important artists who didn't have a label like, oh I don't know, maybe, Beethoven, Bach, Van Gogh, Rodan, Mozart, Tchaichovsky, Matisse, Monet, Longfellow and Dickens. Maybe they could have been immortal had they just had a fuckin' label. Or an Agent, or Personal Assistant, or Chauffeur, or Learjet, or Beach House in Malibu, or 10 Overpaid Suits with a fuckin' law degree. Oh what might have been.
 
[QUOTE='[X]<snip>[/QUOTE]

If you don't like the music then why not leave it alone at just not buying it? Why make this kind of comment in a thread on piracy? The rest of your post reads as a point-by-point justification for it ("Eh, I kind of like it but not enough to pay for it, so I'll just download it instead. PS - Fuck the man!")
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top