Posted by AnthonyR on 12/24/01 11:29

"William Davis" <davisbill@mac.com> wrote in message
news:davisbill-7E9586.22260415102005@news.west.cox.net...
> In article <11klo82agv00uac@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Alpha" <none@none.net> wrote:
>
>> "Tarkus" <karnevil9@beer.com> wrote in message
>> news:xlofjwgubjxo.dlg@tarkus.karnevil9.com...
>> > On 10/10/2005 10:02:59 AM, Henry Padilla wrote:
>> >
>> >> Looks like WB is going to back Blu-Ray. This will probably tip the
>> >> scales on HD-DVD.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9610452/
>> >>
>> >> MS has got to be ready to strangle someone.
>> >
>> > Alpha?
>>
>> Both Blu Ray and HD DVD will fail as they are currently conceived. Mark
>> my
>> words.....both will undergo modification, particularly to remove the Big
>> Brother copy protection envisioned (especially by Blu Ray).
>
> I don't know about "fail" but I suspect that as this generation of kids
> progress through the industry, there'll be a split between the 'sold'
> content and the 'collected' content camps.
>
> For a large slice of the market, the "sold" guys will continue to rely
> on mechanical gizmos and copy protection.
>
> Underneath that, you'll find a continuing, robust and ever shifting
> electronic game conceived along the lines of some permutation of the bit
> torrent concept - where people exchange the content they like - in
> whatever whatever "definition" they enjoy - totally without regard for
> any of the legal niceities.
>
> If a content provider makes it easier to "play legal" like Apple did
> with iTunes (now with VIDEO!) in a model that includes both hardware AND
> software accessibility in a simple, workable model with extras (user
> ratings, tips, mixes, etc) that will do well.
>
> But all the traditional "disc" formats are just fingers in the dikes of
> the reality of the current world of digital content distribution.
>
> They just don't understand that the whole damn technology is shifting
> out from under them by the hour.
>
> Mikey (now 13) wanted some music from a band not on iTunes so I took him
> shopping to a bricks and mortar music store. Whoever made the decision
> not to license to iTunes made him leave his house, physically travel to
> the mall, buy a piece of round plastic encased in MORE plastic -
> "protected" but MORE plastic that he cursed while opening - than ripped
> to his iPod and promptly consigned all the plastic crap INCLUDING the CD
> to the landfill - and charged him almost double ($17) for the privilege
>
> Nice business model.

Not only that, but once Mickey has ripped it to his ipod from cd, he can
e-mail it to friends and they can share it with torrents and it's everywhere
once again, so millions will get it free rather than all the trouble Mickey
went through.
In the end, everyone involved in only making it available on cd to make $17
rather than the $1 per song, will loss out in the long run.

They could have easily sold millions of copies legally for $1 each on
iTunes, but by choosing to be greedy and not make it legally available
online, they create the demand for illegal online downloads and make Zero
from online sales, and less from cd sales too in the end.
Will they learn? I think the smart ones already have....

AnthonyR.
I love buying songs on iTunes, and never go to a cd store anymore. :)
As you pointed out, it's too inconvenient.

[Back to original message]