Bono Calls for Tougher Download Controls

[Uncle]

In other news Avatar has just passed the $1 billion in sales mark worldwide, moving it into the 4th all-time spot. And it's still being shown. Yup, piracy is killing the industry

This is what the majority are saying, that if you produce something worth watching or listening to, people will pay for it. I went and saw Avatar 3d with my two kids, only movie in 2009. Our town had the 2d version, so for Christmas we drove 350 km to Vancouver and it was worth every penny. Bono is a has been since the Joshua Tree and is slowly sliding into oblivion, May he RIP. At this stage of the game he should keep his mouth shut and let people remember him from the good old days. Now he just spews out what he gets paid to do, to stay in the lime light, so people don't say Bono Who.

 

[gdonovan]

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.

Not to mention that the record companies fleece most artists, they don't get a dime from album sales till the companies promotion costs are recouped.

I read one interview some 80's boy band who claimed that 10 years later they are still not getting a dime from album sales due to this clause, what a racket!

 

[gdonovan]

Regardless, sales of music has plummeted in the last 10 years. Yes, part of that is because the baby boomers had finally replaced all of their vinyl albums with CDs, but mostly what happened was an entire generation has grown up believing that it's OK to download music via P2P for free.

Have you considered the thought that the product being sold is utter trash?

I flip through the dial all the time while driving to and from work and most music today is utter trash.

Who would want to buy it? Hence the slide in sales.

 

[hawtrawkr]

Who really cares if the artists don't make as much money? Some of the best artists the world has ever known were starving while they created their art. I for one think it is time to start weeding out the people who are in "it" for the money and start opening everything up to the people who are making music, movies, or art of any form for the love of what they do. Boo fucking Hoo if Bono or Madonna have to sell one of their homes in the Caman Islands. As has been previously mentioned in this thread (and countless others) artists make the bulk of the money they see from touring and merchandise while the the labels take in the bulk of the album sales for themselves.

 

[laguerre]

I think after an article like this is read, a consumer has to identify what will happen if said atrocities against humanities should continue. I am not saying artists shouldn't get paid, they should. Let's say though that piracy becomes rampant. In the time it takes for this to happen, are the people profiting off this industry not going to have due time to transition out of a declining market?

This isn't like a housing market collapse. The market will decline, but executives are going to continue to demand their salary. The will fail at innovating, instead they will continue to beat a dead horse and complain loudly. This loss will then be transfered to the lowest level; those selling CDs and the artist.

If anything, should the recording industry "collapse" is will be from the failure to adapt to the consumer's demand. They have thus far done a poor job at convincing us that their efforts are anything other than motivated by greed. I would wary that not one person believes they should be able to freely distribute all music they own to anyone they want, and/or profit from it.

Many people "sample" music to see what they like. Had we a method that was as effective as the current method of "sampling" you might see a change. Now there is a plethora of ways to access music and determine our interest, so we'd like to pick. When you broaden your support of artist in the industry to help us make these choices, we will be more apt to look to you for our media purchases.

I want to have access to my music when I exercise, commute, work, and relax. I want the same music available, just delivered from many different sources. Show me how you (the industry) has achieved this (included advertising and recommendations), while making my life easier, and you will find my loyalty.

 

[Pepster64]

That makes great business sense make it harder to download.....NOT!!! That would only backfire for it would turn off honest people from buying. I know myself I'll say forget that if I have to have some kind of degree just to figure out how to download (I'm joking).

 

[Lorien]

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.

You know what the saddest part of all of this is?
Works of art are no longer being released into the public domain. Since the passing of the Copyright Act in the late 70's, we have been effectively locking up the sum of our cultural output behind closed doors in a vault guarded by corporate lawyers whose only intent is to keep extracting monopoly rent profits from the work of artists who on many cases are no longer alive.

Do yourself a favor and read this article.

http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/pre1976

 

[Stardusted]

You know what the saddest part of all of this is?
Works of art are no longer being released into the public domain. Since the passing of the Copyright Act in the late 70's, we have been effectively locking up the sum of our cultural output behind closed doors in a vault guarded by corporate lawyers whose only intent is to keep extracting monopoly rent profits from the work of artists who on many cases are no longer alive.

Do yourself a favor and read this article.

http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/pre1976

++++++++++100

Exactly, I feel good to know that at least one more fellow [H] member is aware of the above article.

It sums up in a great way just how hypocritical and greedy the whole art business is.

 

[BloodyIron]

Bono is a fathead who thinks he's all political after sunday bloody sunday. His glasses have got the better of him.

 

[velusip]

Maybe I read it wrong, but did Bono just suggest that internet service providers are partially responsible for copyright violations?

This boy is ignorant.

I read into the article and had to stop at his opinions about cap and trade. It takes a very uninterested person to say things like these.

 

[ProfessorKaos64]

news just in

no one gives a fuck about what bono thinks

I know what an asshole, metallica did it already, nobody cares bono

 

[nakedhand]

What a hypocritical bastard he is.... He must be panicking now that U2 hasnt made a decent record in almost 20 years.

 

[Ibanezfoo]

Bono is the reigning king of douchebags.

 

[finalgt]

I wouldn't pirate music if the industry would come up with a fucking way for me to actually discover artists, or even preview the work of artists I already know about, beyond having to resort to finding fan-made videos on Youtube or listening to shit quality 30 second clips on Amazon.

It absolutely flabbergasts me that they sign all these musicians and expect people to magically discover them.

 

[Ibanezfoo]

Bono is a fathead who thinks he's all political after sunday bloody sunday. His glasses have got the better of him.

Which was written by The Edge after some bombing... who really isn't even that good of a guitarist.

 

[demingo]

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.

You seem to be missing the point, you can want $100k for your pile of shit all you want. Does not mean you are going to get it. Basic economics dictate that the consumer not the producer sets the price for media. I will tie this into your steam comment since that is inaccurate.

It is impossible to sell for a loss on media, short of selling below the cost of distribution. Media, unlike other goods, are not affected by scarcity. If I buy a car, then that is 1 less car for someone else to buy. For there to be another car, another one needs to be made from raw materials, which are limited by nature. Media does not have this problem. If I buy a game on steam, the seller is not giving anything up. A second copy is simply made. If a 3rd person wants to buy the same game, another copy is simply made. There is no realistic limit on how many times a person can buy media. It is not affected by scarcity like other goods. For this reason, the market is different. When there is no worry of lack of supply, consumers tend to pay much less.

Now, add to the fact that there is no scarcity in meda, the fact that media falls into the category of want instead of need far more than most goods. This devalues the product. It means the customer has much more power in setting the price. So while you may want $0.99 for your song mp3, I am only willing to give you $0.50. Since I as a customer do not need to worry about you running out of inventory, then I can choose to wait much longer than for a physical good.

 

[demingo]

You know what the saddest part of all of this is?
Works of art are no longer being released into the public domain. Since the passing of the Copyright Act in the late 70's, we have been effectively locking up the sum of our cultural output behind closed doors in a vault guarded by corporate lawyers whose only intent is to keep extracting monopoly rent profits from the work of artists who on many cases are no longer alive.

Do yourself a favor and read this article.

http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/pre1976

Great post. This sums up a lot of my feelings on copyright and how it is greatly abused. Copyright is a priverledge granted to artists so they can receive compensation for their work. We as a society grant them this, because we feel if they can make enough money to live from their work, they can keep producing art for us to enjoy. And as a whole, we all feel art is worth having.

Current copyright is nothing like what it should be in principle. It no longer exists to allow artists to procude more work. The majority of it simply locks up art and does nothing to further inspire.

 

[Uncle]

Have you considered the thought that the product being sold is utter trash?

I flip through the dial all the time while driving to and from work and most music today is utter trash.

Who would want to buy it? Hence the slide in sales.

You hit the nail, as soon as I get to big cities I find the Classic Rock stations.

 

[Uncle]

++++++++++100

Exactly, I feel good to know that at least one more fellow [H] member is aware of the above article.

It sums up in a great way just how hypocritical and greedy the whole art business is.

Another +100
Now ask yourself why the industry wants to digitize as much of the written word as possible. One can believe its for safe keeping and archiving, or it's all about control of another facet of the media.

 

[uclajd]

Steve, you really left out the money quote:

But we know from America’s noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China’s ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it’s perfectly possible to track content.

Nothing wrong with trying to save on taxes, unless of course you are a lefty celeb always talking about income redistribution.

If Ireland wants Bono's taxes, they should lower rates in accord with the Netherlands.

I just have to plug Bono is Crap.

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.

 

[Serpico]

In other news Avatar has just passed the $1 billion in sales mark worldwide, moving it into the 4th all-time spot. And it's still being shown. Yup, piracy is killing the industry

You realize that James Cameron, genius that he is, did an end-run around piracy by making the film in 3D?

First off, about 15% of the income from Avatar is inflated over normal movies due to the surcharge for 3D glasses (it was another 20% at my theater) and a large number of IMAX screenings. Subtract about $150 million from its take and that's what we're looking at if prices were normal. This is why I wish they'd report the number of tickets sold instead of the dollar figure.

Second, the film being 3D it did two things: It made the film harder to pirate, and it gave people an excuse to see a theater on the big screen with proper presentation instead of sitting at home on their little LCD.

You will see a rise in 3D piracy once 3D displays get more common, and even then it will be more difficult than normal because it will require the camera to be in an optimal area, and it still won't look as good as an original source.

Believe it or not, 3D is a direct reaction from the film industry against piracy. We'll see how long it holds up.

 

[number69]

Fuck Bono.

 

[Derangel]

You realize that James Cameron, genius that he is, did an end-run around piracy by making the film in 3D?

First off, about 15% of the income from Avatar is inflated over normal movies due to the surcharge for 3D glasses (it was another 20% at my theater) and a large number of IMAX screenings. Subtract about $150 million from its take and that's what we're looking at if prices were normal. This is why I wish they'd report the number of tickets sold instead of the dollar figure.

Second, the film being 3D it did two things: It made the film harder to pirate, and it gave people an excuse to see a theater on the big screen with proper presentation instead of sitting at home on their little LCD.

You will see a rise in 3D piracy once 3D displays get more common, and even then it will be more difficult than normal because it will require the camera to be in an optimal area, and it still won't look as good as an original source.

Believe it or not, 3D is a direct reaction from the film industry against piracy. We'll see how long it holds up.

And what about the 10 billion dollars in ticket sales last year? An all time high.

 

[Serpico]

And what about the 10 billion dollars in ticket sales last year? An all time high.

Absolutely. We weren't discussing that though, we were discussing Avatar and how its new method of presentation is one way that studios are rebelling against piracy in the short term. Expect even more 3D films now, clearly audiences like it and clearly it is a way to curb piracy.

Another thing to consider is how much of that record number is a product of inflated ticket prices. Adjust for inflation and the figures are different, which is again why I wish they would report tickets sold instead of the dollar value.

In any case, I don't think that any number that is thrown out, whether it is 10 billion, 20 billion, whatever, justifies piracy (aka stealing). The conclusion that piracy is bad only when box office receipts dip below a certain level is ridiculous.

 

[Derangel]

Absolutely. We weren't discussing that though, we were discussing Avatar and how its new method of presentation is one way that studios are rebelling against piracy in the short term. Expect even more 3D films now, clearly audiences like it and clearly it is a way to curb piracy.

Another thing to consider is how much of that record number is a product of inflated ticket prices. Adjust for inflation and the figures are different, which is again why I wish they would report tickets sold instead of the dollar value.

In any case, I don't think that any number that is thrown out, whether it is 10 billion, 20 billion, whatever, justifies piracy (aka stealing). The conclusion that piracy is bad only when box office receipts dip below a certain level is ridiculous.

Nothing justifies piracy, but I'm just trying to add to the point of it not really hurting the movie industry as bad as the MPAA wants us to believe. I can agree that its having a negative effect on the music industry, but that simply ties back to my first post in this thread.

 

[nilepez]

I hate to argue for the sake of it, but do you have any metrics to back this up?

I'll get back with you. I can find anecdotal evidence hear and there, but I'm still looking for a more definitive source.

 

[nilepez]

QFT. /thread

DONT dare try and tell the populace that illegal downloads are destroying the music industry when last I checked, both industries the RIAA and MPAA fight for had record years last year.

The movie industry had record gross sales. Adjusted for inflation, it's far less impressive.

I have no idea what type of records the Music industry broke, unless it was individual tracks, which is an even less relevant metric.

High quality is my main gripe with online music these days. I pay cash to buy a song/album, not a song/album that's had some it's musical information lost due to lossy audio codecs.

I agree 100% with this. I never have and I never will buy lossy audio files. With that said, I'm not inclined to buy lossless files, unless they're quite a bit cheaper than a CD. In some ways CD's are a pain (must rip and store them), but they're a nice backup medium, they come with artwork/lyrics and they play back without gaps on any car or home stereo.

 

[nilepez]

Uhm. The market. And right now, the market says it's too high. Period.

Actually, the market says that free is cheaper than everything else.
If you could get any new car delivered to your door for free, why would you buy it?

The same thing will happen to the movie industry and if all console games were easily pirated without any mods to the hardware, the gaming industry would suffer the same fate. And make no mistake about it, everyone on here would eventually talk about how games cost too much.

 

[nilepez]

Have you considered the thought that the product being sold is utter trash?
I flip through the dial all the time while driving to and from work and most music today is utter trash.
Who would want to buy it? Hence the slide in sales.

That would imply that people are not illegally downloading music, which is clearly not the case.

 

[Derangel]

Actually, the market says that free is cheaper than everything else.
If you could get any new car delivered to your door for free, why would you buy it?

The same thing will happen to the movie industry and if all console games were easily pirated without any mods to the hardware, the gaming industry would suffer the same fate. And make no mistake about it, everyone on here would eventually talk about how games cost too much.

No, not really. The market is saying music costs too much for what it offers. There is a point at which people will by music again. The industry just needs to pull its head out of its ass and try to figure out what people want.

 

[MavericK]

Bono is a douche.

/thread

 

[nilepez]

You seem to be missing the point, you can want $100k for your pile of shit all you want. Does not mean you are going to get it. Basic economics dictate that the consumer not the producer sets the price for media. I will tie this into your steam comment since that is inaccurate.

It is impossible to sell for a loss on media, short of selling below the cost of distribution. Media, unlike other goods, are not affected by scarcity. If I buy a car, then that is 1 less car for someone else to buy. For there to be another car, another one needs to be made from raw materials, which are limited by nature. Media does not have this problem. If I buy a game on steam, the seller is not giving anything up. A second copy is simply made. If a 3rd person wants to buy the same game, another copy is simply made. There is no realistic limit on how many times a person can buy media. It is not affected by scarcity like other goods. For this reason, the market is different. When there is no worry of lack of supply, consumers tend to pay much less.

Now, add to the fact that there is no scarcity in meda, the fact that media falls into the category of want instead of need far more than most goods. This devalues the product. It means the customer has much more power in setting the price. So while you may want $0.99 for your song mp3, I am only willing to give you $0.50. Since I as a customer do not need to worry about you running out of inventory, then I can choose to wait much longer than for a physical good.

That's fine. But when people say, I don't want to pay X, so I'll just download it for free, then the system is broken. It's no longer based on demand, it's based on the ability to copy the product and give it away for free.

Thus, they are stealing that pile of shit. You can be certain that there are people that would buy the music, if not for the fact that they can illegally download it for free.

 

[powertower]

Reminds me of that South Park episode where hes in a third world country going "yeah yeah yeah yeah" to all the sick childred.

 

[Arcygenical]

Actually, the market says that free is cheaper than everything else.
If you could get any new car delivered to your door for free, why would you buy it?

Were that true - why would iTunes and digital music sales be so successful right now (IE compared to physical media sales)?

People *are* willing to buy music, and sales are proportionate to what is offered. At 50c a pop (or 99c for a double/triple package) for good 256kbps MP4 music - I'd buy *all* my music.

Content will always be pirated, as it always has been - but I outright guarantee sales would increase if the price/content ratio was better.

 

[nathancipher]

I'll get back with you. I can find anecdotal evidence hear and there, but I'm still looking for a more definitive source.

I doubt you will find anything more than anecdotal evidence and that's a very real problem with having this sort of discussion. Sales figures are concrete and easy to track. Who downloads what is a bit more amorphous to say the least. Suffice to say, people are likely downloading pirated content, but how many and how much? It would be nigh impossible to get solid metrics due to the decentralized nature of p2p. You could pull figures from say lamewire and extrapolate but that's still not really any better than an educated guess.

I really do wonder how much of the record industry's decline is due to the fact that people are offering new and innovative material for free on the internet when the record companies are pushing the same old formulaic top 40 material.

I think there may be a lot of people out there like me who realize that there are boatloads free, legitimate and yet still very entertaining media of all variety for free on this here internet.

 

[Serpico]

That's fine. But when people say, I don't want to pay X, so I'll just download it for free, then the system is broken. It's no longer based on demand, it's based on the ability to copy the product and give it away for free.

Thus, they are stealing that pile of shit. You can be certain that there are people that would buy the music, if not for the fact that they can illegally download it for free.

QFT x1000

Not like it matters, people will continue to run circles around their brain trying to justify the theft of music or games or whatever, then later on they'll wonder why companies won't create products geared towards them anymore, ie - PC gamers that pirate away, who then wonder why all of their favorite developers are targeting game consoles now.

 

[Shalafi]

Bono should be sent to a Siberian labor camp which would give him time to see the error of his ways

 

[starsfan7]

QFT x1000

Not like it matters, people will continue to run circles around their brain trying to justify the theft of music or games or whatever, then later on they'll wonder why companies won't create products geared towards them anymore, ie - PC gamers that pirate away, who then wonder why all of their favorite developers are targeting game consoles now.

I won't try and justify stealing, but what I will justify is that if I paid for a movie or music, no matter what format it is in, I should be able to do whatever I damn well please with it. What all the studio people seem to fail to realize, is all these DRM schemes and anti-piracy crap don't bother a "thief", they are going to break the law anyway, you know, cause they are a criminal. Sure the anti-piracy stuff might slow them down, but in the end they will just end up alienating paying customers with restrictions on things that they are supposed to own. I stopped "pirating" music years ago, but I'll tell you that Amazon's MP3 music store was a godsend when I first used it, unrestricted MP3's at 99 cents a pop? Hell, I got new CD's from the prodigy and the crystal method for 1.99 for the whole CD the day they came out. Legally. This is how you stop piracy, competition.

 

[Derangel]

QFT x1000

Not like it matters, people will continue to run circles around their brain trying to justify the theft of music or games or whatever, then later on they'll wonder why companies won't create products geared towards them anymore, ie - PC gamers that pirate away, who then wonder why all of their favorite developers are targeting game consoles now.

A lot of times PC devs use piracy as an excuse (Epic) or have no freaking clue what they are talking about (Crytek). If there wasn't good money to be made on the PC people wouldn't make games on it. Anyone expecting devs that traditionally have lower sales to stay exclusive to any platform is an idiot as there is a lot more money to be made supporting multiple of them. Its not just piracy, its complexity and cost of development constantly going up. Microsoft did probably one of the smartest moves possible by making the 360 easy to port to from the PC and vice-versa. Without that you can bet there would be a lot less of those devs looking at consoles.

 

[Derangel]

I won't try and justify stealing, but what I will justify is that if I paid for a movie or music, no matter what format it is in, I should be able to do whatever I damn well please with it. What all the studio people seem to fail to realize, is all these DRM schemes and anti-piracy crap don't bother a "thief", they are going to break the law anyway, you know, cause they are a criminal. Sure the anti-piracy stuff might slow them down, but in the end they will just end up alienating paying customers with restrictions on things that they are supposed to own. I stopped "pirating" music years ago, but I'll tell you that Amazon's MP3 music store was a godsend when I first used it, unrestricted MP3's at 99 cents a pop? Hell, I got new CD's from the prodigy and the crystal method for 1.99 for the whole CD the day they came out. Legally. This is how you stop piracy, competition.

Yeah, Amazon's MP3 store is great. The prices can be stupid at times, but you can find some damn good deals there too. Was idly looking through the metal section today and found a few things I'm gonna have to grab at some point.