Alan Gerow 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (522)

• On the post: Will People Pay For Content Online?

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 17 Feb, 2010 @ 12:42pm

  Re: Re: Even without the revised graph....

  Actually, $1.29 is the price point the record labels want for hot new releases and pushed Apple into a corner for it. Apple wants $.99 for everything ... I'm sure the vast majority of music purchasers would prefer way less.

• On the post: Will People Pay For Content Online?

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 17 Feb, 2010 @ 12:37pm

  It's worth reiterating that the orange bar are people who would "consider" paying. Not "would pay", or "will pay", or even "will pay if..." ... but would "consider".
  
  So, there still needs to be a reason to buy. There needs to be something that would make these people want to buy, and not just consider it.
  
  I'd consider buying movies, music, and everything on-line. But as of yet, no one has given me a compelling reason to.

• On the post: Sarcasm Wars: Proprietary SarcMark Gets Some Sarcastic Open Competition

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 17 Feb, 2010 @ 12:02pm

  Re:

  "Seriously, how often do you use % for anything anyway?"
  
  I'm not sure on a rate of usage, but I know I use it correctly 100% of the time.

• On the post: Redbox Caves To Warner Bros., Will Delay New Movie Releases From Kiosks

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 17 Feb, 2010 @ 09:04am

  Re: I Just Don't Understand Your Thinking

  When they purchase a DVD, they legally own the DVD and can do with it as they please (short of duplicating it for commercial gain ... that's "bootlegging", or displaying it to too large a group of people on too large of a screen ... that's a "public performance"), including renting it out.
  
  Copyright does not apply here.

• On the post: Grateful Dead Always Knew How To Connect With Fans

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 15 Feb, 2010 @ 07:09pm

  Re: is this fair use?

  While the Dead support the bootleg community, they do not support the copying of their studio releases.

• On the post: Five Reasons Not To Get Swept Up In App Madness

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 01:49pm

  Re: Apps are the new Ringtones

  "Does anyone still care about Ringtones?"
  
  Yes.
  
  But not paying for ringtones. Paying for 15 seconds of a full song you've already paid for ... that's what people don't care about.

• On the post: Iceland Wants To Become A Hub For Free Speech Journalism Protection

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 01:47pm

  Re: Re: Financial Aid

  It used to be a core element in the national mythology of the U.S. as well. I think there used to be Constitutional Amendments regarding it, I think. But no one pays any attention to those anymore.

• On the post: Judge Not Amused By South Butt's Amusing Legal Filing

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 01:43pm

  How dare the lawyers talk like regular people. They need to speak in legalese! Otherwise, why else would someone need several degrees and certification to understand what everyone else is talking about?!?
  
  What about the law professors right to get paid?!?!?!?

• On the post: Author Claims $9.99 Is Not A 'Real Price' For Books

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 12:24pm

  Re: What is a real price

  "The advent of ebooks makes things hard as printing and distribution are two major cost factors in working out your base line cost (and therefore what you think a real price should be)"
  
  Why should someone buying an eBook subsidize printing & distribution costs? Those costs should only be associated to the printed versions and should not carry over to the eBook versions.
  
  As eBook sales pick up, number of printed copies goes down. As the volume savings decreases, the printed version price should go up, and the eBook price should be unaffected. The eBooks price should account for author payouts, editing costs, page layout, and marketing ... plus retailer mark-up. That's it. The existence of paper versions and costs associated with printing & physical distribution should not even enter the eBook pricing picture.
  
  When paperback books with printing & distribution costs can be $9.99 and less, then why again should an eBook version cost more than that when it should not have to account for printing & distribution costs at all?
  
  I paid $250 for my physical representation of a book. I should not be expected to help fund other people's physical product by subsidizing the printed versions with my eBook purchases.

• On the post: Author Claims $9.99 Is Not A 'Real Price' For Books

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 08:46am

  Re: Re: What is a real price

  Well, the retailer won't need to spend as much since eBooks don't require warehouse spacing, staff to stock, ship, and sell. So, that number drops. A lot.
  
  I would say your 20% total cost difference is ridiculously low.
  
  I'm seeing:
  
  $4 to author
  $4 to pre-production
  $2 to marketing
  plus retailer mark up.
  
  So, that's $10, plus retailer mark up. Retailers selling eBooks get to decide what they want to make off of a book, not the author.
  
  So, $9.99 looks to be the perfect "real price" for everyone involved. Except eBook retailers. But they aren't the ones complaining.

• On the post: Author Claims $9.99 Is Not A 'Real Price' For Books

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 08:37am

  Re:

  fail.

• On the post: EMI Tries Fake Word Of Mouth Campaign To Promote Ok Go

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 12 Feb, 2010 @ 08:25am

  Re:

  They're calling what they're doing a "viral video". For what they are doing, it's not a "viral video", but EMI bribing people to Tweet about them. As such, for what they say they are doing: they are doing it wrong.
  
  As a general marketing strategy, yes let's see if it works before saying it's a failure. But if they claim to be doing a "viral video", they are doing it wrong, because that's not, by definition, what a "viral video" is.

• On the post: Would A Moron In A Hurry Be Confused By The Difference Between A High School And A Pickup Truck?

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2010 @ 12:26pm

  Re:

  There's more than one way to defend a trademark, though. Simply filing a lawsuit is not the single road to protecting your trademark.

• On the post: Summit Entertainment Sues, Saying Only It Can Make A Documentary About How 'Twilight' Impacted Forks, WA

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2010 @ 12:23pm

  Re: Is it legal to steal a pitch idea?

  "What is the recourse, if any?"
  
  Putting out a better product.

• On the post: Summit Entertainment Sues, Saying Only It Can Make A Documentary About How 'Twilight' Impacted Forks, WA

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2010 @ 12:22pm

  Re: let me ge this straight

  That's what NDAs are for. It shouldn't be illegal if there's no agreement. And if the person won't agree to your NDA or such contract before hearing the idea, then you keep your idea to yourself and go on your way.
  
  You can't copyright ideas. It's the execution of the idea that you can lay claim to.

• On the post: Would A Moron In A Hurry Be Confused By The Difference Between A High School And A Pickup Truck?

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2010 @ 09:38am

  I'm going to have to side with Dodge on this one. While they are different industries (automotive manufacturing vs education), a moron in a hurry may not see a logo and initially know what the logo is for. Since the logo is an exact copy of previous work, simply seeing the logo on display in many cases would not make it totally clear on what the logo is representing. If the logo is on the side of a bus that the football team is riding to another school, is the bus a Dodge? Or is the bus advertising the team inside? If someone is wearing a t-shirt, is that a pro-Dodge t-shirt, or a support for the local high school t-shirt? In a hurry, it's fuzzy because of the direct copy.
  
  If the logo were used in a parody or satirical nature, or transformed into a unique piece of work, I would concede there enters a gray area ... but copying a logo and removing the shield border, that's lame on a personal level, and highly questionable from a legal one.
  
  Though, I personally think the better response from Dodge would be to instead of calling the lawyer goons, make a large donation to the athletic of the rival school.
  
  "You steal our logo, we'll steal your championship."

• On the post: Iran Says No To Gmail; Yes To 'We Spy On You' Email

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2010 @ 08:00am

  Re:

  When the wall is actually made of fire ...

• On the post: Missed Use Case? Google Buzz Reveals Who You Chat With The Most To Everyone

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2010 @ 07:54am

  Re: Perhaps someone with secrets shouldn't use free services

  That's actually the best response I've read.

• On the post: Warner Music Shoots Self In Head; Says No More Free Streaming

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 10 Feb, 2010 @ 03:40pm

  Re:

  "Is WMG going to pull all their content from radio as well?"
  
  No, they're working on getting them to pay, too.

• On the post: Warner Music Shoots Self In Head; Says No More Free Streaming

  

  Alan Gerow ( profile ), 10 Feb, 2010 @ 03:38pm

  Re: Streaming and Warner...

  "It seems to me that this enormously selfish generation does not understand that the labels compensate the artists that pour their hearts and souls into a production."
  
  It seems to me that you're an old timer who believes the BS the recording industry has spoon fed you. They don't compensate the artists. The artists get an advance, and the rest of the recording sales goes to paying off that advance. The record companies make sure their accounting makes it so that the advance is never paid off and the artists never make royalties off of the recordings. It's the CEOs of the record companies that get compensated for the artists' hearts & souls.
  
  Artists that make money making music make the lion's share of their money off of touring and merchandising. This has been the case for decades and isn't changing any time soon (in fact, one could easily argue that touring & live performances have been the only way most musicians have ever made a sustainable living in all of human existence ... this recorded music thing is a fad of the latter half of the 20th century). The only people who are hurt by "this enormously selfish generation" are the enormously selfish CEOs who feel they are entitled to money from everyone for no reason what-so-ever than because they are.

Next >>