Ok, this just stupidly wrong. Books are the original pirated content. Books have been pirated from literally hundreds of years. The first, or what is historically accepted as the first excluding the bible, published novel, Don Quixote, was heavily pirated. By the time the author got around to writing a sequel there was already a sequel that someone else had written, so what did he do? He wrote in a section where his, the original, Don met the fake one and people loved it.
If anything, the music/movie industry should be learning from the the publishing industry.
I think that their app is a good example of added value. Now, granted that it is just a repackaging of something that is already out there for free, but if the fact that there is now a CNN app pushes people to pay then I can only assume that added some value. People won't pay for things they don't want or need and people won't pay for what is already free. So, you have to decide whether the app is worth the money and at $2 I would have to say its worth checking out.
"It has been years since I had the adolescent distrust of those responsible for my protection."
So, in the past, you have distrusted law enforcement? Calling my distrust 'adolescent' is basically saying "I'm not listening because you're a kid, despite the fact that I have in fact held this very opinion in the past."
YOUR protection? If I were to guess, I would say you still support the Bush administration.
Growing up I never once thought about going through the trouble of placing a video camera in a dark room pointed at a TV in order to copy a VHS to circumvent the copy-protection on it. However, my step-father did so hundreds of times, and being proud of his bootlegging has since told me all about it. Now I have knowledge of a method to illegally copy a VHS tape.
I wonder how many kids would have never thought to download music illegally that will now have knowledge of a practice that will fizzle out given the opportunity.
Quite an interesting point, I wonder how many industries this concept can be seen in? I.E., Downloading music leads to stealing cds from stores/Downloading music leads to not obtaining the phyical album.
I have read all sorts of articles on this proposed paywall idea, but every paper that I work with has said that they have no intentions of implementing such. This leads me to believe that the paywall concept is all hype created by NewsCorp.
While I agree that she didn't really break the law and therefore should not have been arrested, I have to say that the alternatives could have been much worse.
Lets say that she continued to post info and nothing was done to stop it. Eventually public officials are going to be getting harassed to the point that legislation would past to make such information classified, or push individuals in public jobs to lie about personal information to avoid such treatment.
I know that this doesn't look good for Pandora, and believe when I say that I died a little inside when I heard about this, but this could still very much go either way. The obvious, and massively destructive, path that this can take is that Pandora really has stuck its dick into a succubus. However, it is possible that Pandora is just trying to get someone other than Pandora to speak up. Other than a story about a high-school radio station I have heard nothing about traditional radio fighting back.
Note: If Pandora really has gone to the darkside, I will go right back to downloading music via torrents. The RIAA will never win...
Come now, common sense has been dead for years now. You might not remember though; much like Farra Fauset's death being over-shadowed by that of the king of pop, the death common sense was pushed aside by the death of privacy.
You raise a good point. If I were a musician, why would I continue to produce songs at my expense if they are freely available to all? Well, as a musician I tend to think that the music is a gift that should not be paid for. If you buy a CD, you are buying the physical CD not the contents. Musicians also profit from merchandise and ticket sales.
I guess the bottom line is that if something is truly infinite and you charge others for the use of it, you are effectively making it finite because at some point everyone who is willing to pay for it will have done so.