Many US publishers do not like the Asian play-for-free model simply because the publishers feel that a "free" game is perceived by westerners as being low quality.
any Judge who starts out a sentencing hearing with "It's my firm belief" when that "belief" is totally contrary to well known scientific facts should be thrown off the bench.
If someone doesn't have something, but then ends up WITH something, but didn't pay for it or obtain it legally, how did they get it? You say it isn't "theft", it is just infringement and that is okay, no harm no foul, right? But in the end, there is harm, there is foul, there is no debate about it.
Theres only "harm" if the person in question had any intentions of paying for it to begin with and given the averages taken from informal polls, you can generally assume that 95% would NOT have bought anything.
People like yourself keep trying to argue ethics in a way that if you win said argument people will come to their senses and start buying again. "Debate" it until you turn blue, people are going to copy unless they have a more attractive option that is actually worth their cash. THAT is what there is no "debate" about.
what kills me is there are plenty of businesses that buy up blocks of tickets for various high-demand events and slap huge "processing fees, surcharges etc" and they get away with it.
Some poor slob who sells his ticket for a few bucks profit is technically breaking the law.
I beleive Minn. got burned already by grandstanding issues that are proven unconstitutional. Case in point, Jack Thompson-style video game legislation that they tried to ram through and got slapped down by the court.
At least they are learning from their mistakes which is more than I can say for some other states.
Of course leaders should always be learning. That's a given. But are they serious? Isn't this a little late? If newspaper industry leaders aren't doing this already, do they really belong in their positions? Why should shareholders pay executives to learn all they can when they should be able to find ones who already know what they're doing? If people need advice like this, should they be running newspaper companies?
Remove the word "newspaper" and thats not only a perfect encapsulation of large media outfits but also the music industry, the movie industry, the auto industry or fill-in-your-choice-here.......
At least we now know that the musicians who contracted with this parasitic and morally bankrupt company knew full well what they were getting into and deserve to be shafted.
RSS
Twitter
Re: (as Tom Landry)
They also invented Heroin
(as Tom Landry)
Heres a better way to lower health care costs.....tort reform.
Back-charge attorneys the cost of plaintiffs legal fees if they lose.
Re: some people are making money (as Tom Landry)
Many US publishers do not like the Asian play-for-free model simply because the publishers feel that a "free" game is perceived by westerners as being low quality.
Maybe this is changing.
(as Tom Landry)
I get the feeling Mike lived for this day.....
(as Tom Landry)
any Judge who starts out a sentencing hearing with "It's my firm belief" when that "belief" is totally contrary to well known scientific facts should be thrown off the bench.
Re: (as Tom Landry)
If someone doesn't have something, but then ends up WITH something, but didn't pay for it or obtain it legally, how did they get it? You say it isn't "theft", it is just infringement and that is okay, no harm no foul, right? But in the end, there is harm, there is foul, there is no debate about it.
Theres only "harm" if the person in question had any intentions of paying for it to begin with and given the averages taken from informal polls, you can generally assume that 95% would NOT have bought anything.
People like yourself keep trying to argue ethics in a way that if you win said argument people will come to their senses and start buying again. "Debate" it until you turn blue, people are going to copy unless they have a more attractive option that is actually worth their cash. THAT is what there is no "debate" about.
(as Tom Landry)
Nice slapdown Mike. One of your better ones actually.
(as Tom Landry)
what kills me is there are plenty of businesses that buy up blocks of tickets for various high-demand events and slap huge "processing fees, surcharges etc" and they get away with it.
Some poor slob who sells his ticket for a few bucks profit is technically breaking the law.
(as Tom Landry)
I beleive Minn. got burned already by grandstanding issues that are proven unconstitutional. Case in point, Jack Thompson-style video game legislation that they tried to ram through and got slapped down by the court.
At least they are learning from their mistakes which is more than I can say for some other states.
(as Tom Landry)
*adds Bing to his toolbar*
(as Tom Landry)
Of course leaders should always be learning. That's a given. But are they serious? Isn't this a little late? If newspaper industry leaders aren't doing this already, do they really belong in their positions? Why should shareholders pay executives to learn all they can when they should be able to find ones who already know what they're doing? If people need advice like this, should they be running newspaper companies?
Remove the word "newspaper" and thats not only a perfect encapsulation of large media outfits but also the music industry, the movie industry, the auto industry or fill-in-your-choice-here.......
-Lucretious
Re: Piracy matters (as Tom Landry)
You sound exactly like the kind of tool that keeps this kind of moronic overreaction to piracy going.
I'm guessing you work for the industry in some capacity?
Re: Try to do some research next time (as Tom Landry)
Thanks for the clarification.
At least we now know that the musicians who contracted with this parasitic and morally bankrupt company knew full well what they were getting into and deserve to be shafted.
The scum always floats to the top.
(as Tom Landry)
sounds like a responsible police department.
No doubt they'll petition the court to try the 2 yr old as an adult.
(as Tom Landry)
sounds like PR suicide if they did shut these vids down.
then again, they haven't shown they're a bright point of intelligence over at the RIAA so who knows.....
Re: The internet IS bad if... (as Lucretious)
I have the feeling the unregulated flow of info isn't going to last much longer.
Guys like this have a way of coming together to change laws that will ultimately benefit only them.
(as Lucretious)
I'm constantly amazed at how much invasion of their privacy Brits are willing to put up with.
Re: (as Lucretious)
grabbing for racial straws, don't you think?
Re: Re: Re: Stereotypes (as Lucretious)
Instead of a long drawn out explanation how about tack is allowed to have an opinion and leave it at that?
don't respond to the hyper-PC crowd, it only encourages stupid panicked responses from people trying to prove how not racist they are.