Like many of the sites they complain about, Mr. Lamy sees WIkipedia as having a single purpose, namely providing students with an easy source from which they can copy material without thinking. Clearly this is the only possible use of Wikipedia, and only plagiarists visit the site. Kind of like MegaUpload...
It's a good move for Netflix. Apparently the studios think that rather than wait a month for a new release on disc, somehow all the Netflix subscribers will go out an buy it. I suspect that after 6 months of this, they'll realize they gave Netflix a deal that worked out great for Netflix, but didn't provide the studios with the profit bump they were expecting.
Netflix streaming is great. My only complaint has been the weak selection available. If they can increase this, all the better.
Economics - by having a single hardware platform to aim at, developers can make games faster and more easily. The PC as a platform is a huge range of incompatible hardware. The 360 or PS3 is the same for anyone who owns one. If you aim your game at the PC market, you usually compromise on performance - it's much harder to "code to the metal" and squeeze every cycle out.
Of course, this advantage is undermined to some extent by the fact that there are 3 platforms, but 3 is better than thousands.
An update to Felix's article from a NYT spokesman says that links you follow to articles on the site from outside the site won't count toward your total. Let's see then - I could set up a site called FreeNYTimes that contains nothing but links to their articles. You could follow as many of them as you like, and never hit the paywall.
While that does handle the "cut off from the web" problem, it's hard to see them making any money this way. Still, I could be wrong - maybe some folks just like to go their site and read, and are willing to pay for it. But enough?
Go the the website for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers mentioned in the article. Look at the members listed at the bottom of the page. Don't buy cars from any of these manufacturers. Vote with your wallet. Not all auto makers do this.
Imagine a world where the news folks got their wish. No one could link to their story. No other news organization could refer to the story. People couldn't even talk about what they read. The only way to find out about the story would be to go to their site and read it.
If you didn't already subscribe, how would you know to go there? Would it even really be news if only one site could talk about it?
I'd really like a Kindle. I've always been an early adopter of new tech, and the Kindle really appeals to me in principle. However, Amazon is offering me less if I buy an ebook than I'd get if I bought the low tech version. Remotely disabling features (and entire collections) is unacceptable. I didn't rent the book - I bought it. From that point forward, they should have no say over what I do with it. But they do.
As long as this is the case, the Kindle will remain an attractive piece of tech with a fatally flawed implementation. A shame.
I'd really like a Kindle. I've always been an early adopter of new tech, and the Kindle really appeals to me in principle. However, Amazon is offering me less if I buy an ebook than I'd get if I bought the low tech version. Remotely disabling features (and entire collections) is unacceptable. I didn't rent the book - I bought it. From that point forward, they should have no say over what I do with it. But they do.
As long as this is the case, the Kindle will remain an attractive piece of tech with a fatally flawed implementation. A shame.
I was afraid they'd make some deal with the Author's Guild or publishers to give them extra money for every ebook, because now it could be read aloud. But they didn't - they put the decision in the hands of the publishers, and it'll be book-by-book.
This is great! There will be publishers who opt to make this an extra charge, and those who do not. Then the market will decide. All books won't be affected, only those chosen by the publishers.
And who comes out looking like the bad guy? Not the company who can say "the publisher disabled this neat feature for this particular book." Amazon can rightly claim that the feature is there, unless the publisher decides to disable it. If you had 100 books on your Kindle, and one of them wouldn't do text-to-speech because the publisher decided not to allow it, who would you complain to?
It's not the shop's job to give you a way of distinguishing yourselves - it's yours. Give the first buyer some kind of premium - posters, one-time in-game items, $10 off their next game from your company - something only the first buyer gets. Many will pay the extra $5-10 to get something they can't get from the used game.
... I'd be really interested in this, not to determine what statements my opponent makes that stress him out, but which statements my side says that stress out my opponents!
As someone who works for a very large company, I can state that big companies commonly take a much simpler and cheaper method against innovative startups - they buy them.
I realize that the evidence suggests that movie downloads don't affect ticket sales. Has there been any research on the impact of downloads on DVD sales? How about movie rentals?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by PassinThru.
Actually the tweet is consistent with RIAA/MPAA philosophy
Like many of the sites they complain about, Mr. Lamy sees WIkipedia as having a single purpose, namely providing students with an easy source from which they can copy material without thinking. Clearly this is the only possible use of Wikipedia, and only plagiarists visit the site. Kind of like MegaUpload...
You forgot one
6. The written word will kill the memorization of epic poems!
This is an old one - ancient Greece? - and actually, it was true. Hard to see how this was a bad thing though.
This won't work like the studios think
It's a good move for Netflix. Apparently the studios think that rather than wait a month for a new release on disc, somehow all the Netflix subscribers will go out an buy it. I suspect that after 6 months of this, they'll realize they gave Netflix a deal that worked out great for Netflix, but didn't provide the studios with the profit bump they were expecting.
Netflix streaming is great. My only complaint has been the weak selection available. If they can increase this, all the better.
And the physical media death spiral continues...
The Good Reason
Economics - by having a single hardware platform to aim at, developers can make games faster and more easily. The PC as a platform is a huge range of incompatible hardware. The 360 or PS3 is the same for anyone who owns one. If you aim your game at the PC market, you usually compromise on performance - it's much harder to "code to the metal" and squeeze every cycle out.
Of course, this advantage is undermined to some extent by the fact that there are 3 platforms, but 3 is better than thousands.
"That's right, ladies and gentlemen of the jury - the defendant is not only a subversive, but an UNREGISTERED subversive!"
Apparently not a paywall at all
An update to Felix's article from a NYT spokesman says that links you follow to articles on the site from outside the site won't count toward your total. Let's see then - I could set up a site called FreeNYTimes that contains nothing but links to their articles. You could follow as many of them as you like, and never hit the paywall.
While that does handle the "cut off from the web" problem, it's hard to see them making any money this way. Still, I could be wrong - maybe some folks just like to go their site and read, and are willing to pay for it. But enough?
You have a choice
Go the the website for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers mentioned in the article. Look at the members listed at the bottom of the page. Don't buy cars from any of these manufacturers. Vote with your wallet. Not all auto makers do this.
If they got what they want
Imagine a world where the news folks got their wish. No one could link to their story. No other news organization could refer to the story. People couldn't even talk about what they read. The only way to find out about the story would be to go to their site and read it.
If you didn't already subscribe, how would you know to go there? Would it even really be news if only one site could talk about it?
Too bad really
I'd really like a Kindle. I've always been an early adopter of new tech, and the Kindle really appeals to me in principle. However, Amazon is offering me less if I buy an ebook than I'd get if I bought the low tech version. Remotely disabling features (and entire collections) is unacceptable. I didn't rent the book - I bought it. From that point forward, they should have no say over what I do with it. But they do.
As long as this is the case, the Kindle will remain an attractive piece of tech with a fatally flawed implementation. A shame.
Too bad really
I'd really like a Kindle. I've always been an early adopter of new tech, and the Kindle really appeals to me in principle. However, Amazon is offering me less if I buy an ebook than I'd get if I bought the low tech version. Remotely disabling features (and entire collections) is unacceptable. I didn't rent the book - I bought it. From that point forward, they should have no say over what I do with it. But they do.
As long as this is the case, the Kindle will remain an attractive piece of tech with a fatally flawed implementation. A shame.
From Amazon's point of view, a shrewd solution
I was afraid they'd make some deal with the Author's Guild or publishers to give them extra money for every ebook, because now it could be read aloud. But they didn't - they put the decision in the hands of the publishers, and it'll be book-by-book.
This is great! There will be publishers who opt to make this an extra charge, and those who do not. Then the market will decide. All books won't be affected, only those chosen by the publishers.
And who comes out looking like the bad guy? Not the company who can say "the publisher disabled this neat feature for this particular book." Amazon can rightly claim that the feature is there, unless the publisher decides to disable it. If you had 100 books on your Kindle, and one of them wouldn't do text-to-speech because the publisher decided not to allow it, who would you complain to?
Hint: not Amazon.
A way of distiguishing
It's not the shop's job to give you a way of distinguishing yourselves - it's yours. Give the first buyer some kind of premium - posters, one-time in-game items, $10 off their next game from your company - something only the first buyer gets. Many will pay the extra $5-10 to get something they can't get from the used game.
Then just let the market work.
If I were a campaign manager...
... I'd be really interested in this, not to determine what statements my opponent makes that stress him out, but which statements my side says that stress out my opponents!
Doesn't naked short-selling == infinite supply of shares?
If a company has 100 shares of stock, and you and I and 99 of our closest friends short 100 shares, you're telling me the price won't go down?
Big Companies
As someone who works for a very large company, I can state that big companies commonly take a much simpler and cheaper method against innovative startups - they buy them.
I remember those...
Actually, I remember kind of freaking out to the last section of Jimi Hendrix's "Bold as Love" played over headphones. The effect was semi-psychedelic
That was binaural, right?
What about DVD sales?
I realize that the evidence suggests that movie downloads don't affect ticket sales. Has there been any research on the impact of downloads on DVD sales? How about movie rentals?