   |
   |
  |
Posted on 12/24/2015 5:47:20 PM PST by Utilizer
Former Pirate Bay spokesperson Peter Sunde has always been very outspoken about people's inherent drive to copy things.
Last year he paid the ultimate price of sacrificing his freedom for his involvement in TPB, but that hasn't changed his core 'kopimi' values.
One of Peter's major frustrations is how the entertainment industries handles the idea of copying. When calculating the losses piracy costs, they often put too much value on pirated copies.
This is something Peter knows all too well, as he still owes various movie and music companies millions in damages.
However, this hasn't stopped him from continuing to copy. In fact, he's just built the ultimate copying machine using a Raspberry Pi, an LCD display and some Python code.
With these three ingredients the "Kopimashin" makes 100 copies of the Gnarls Barkely track "Crazy" every second. This translates to more than eight million copies per day and roughly $10 million in 'losses.'
(Excerpt) Read more at torrentfreak.com ...
Why didn’t you post the whole article? Were you afraid that Torrentfreak would sue you for copyright infringement?
There are several links in the article that I did not include for brevity’s sake, but if you follow the link you can click on them if you are curious enough.
It’s not a fallacy.
It is somewhat a fallacy, and also somewhat true.
Clearly the problem is if the music is available for $0.00 there is no incentive to pay for it, meaning the artists and record companies get nothing.
There needs to be a middle ground somehow.
Much of youtube is bootleg and youtube is adding pay-for-download to their business model.
The labels made a deal with the streaming audio providers. They will collect money and the artists still won’t get anything.
Allowing trading music does not prevent a band from achieving commercial success (e.g., Grateful Dead).
A bit of irony in excerpting a story on the ‘virtues’ of copyright piracy.
It only costs the artist if the end user would have paid for it otherwise. And downloaders never would...
Bkmrk.
Free c rap is still crap
It is a fallacy in how the music industry estimates the value of the tunes they sell. They claim it is worth x- amount and complain about “lost revenue” when in actuality the cost to them is nothing close to what they claim.
When I first looked at this ‘problem’ in the early nineties, the costs for the record labels to stamp out a single cd was less than ten cents per disc -and that was including the price of both the plastic and the machinery operating costs. I am fairly certain it has dropped down even lower since then.
Then figure that the actual recording artists are receiving only a fraction of what their discs sell for and you will quickly realize that the artists themselves are not being hurt so much as it is claimed, and indeed some would argue that the increased publicity from the downloads actually increases sales.
Finally, realize that the actual groupmembers are legally unable to provide downloads to directly achieve a personal profit (or a charitable cause) due to the contract(s) they signed with the major labels themselves, and you can easily see that the riaa and their ilk are attempting to create gold from gab.
Then re-read the article: this bloke is “downloading” at a phenomenal rate to a nulldevice, the equivalent to a single loop of continually-recording magnetic tape -but the recording industry claims the full 40 dollars or so for each “download” is “a loss”.
Makes no bloody sense at all, once you think about it.
See My #4...
Oh yes it is
It’s not ‘trading’ - it is my sweat and work and you are stealing it. And it is why very few acts make any money AT ALL from record sales any more.
Some of us out here are not interested in touring endlessly in order to eke out a crappy living.
Thief.
Are you a mental case!?
The Grateful Dead allowed their music to be freely traded. I have a large collection of their bootlegs, and no, that doesn’t make me a thief.
Please take your meds.
Not every group has a coterie of insanely rabid fans to follow every thing they do and buy out their every one of their concerts. Groups like that are rare and far between. Some performers cannot even do live performances. Others the cost of performing far exceeds the income possible to be brought in. Recording sales provides their income.
What you are saying about income is the exact opposite of what my friends in the industry have told me. They all say they make nothing off album sales, and that their tours are where they make the money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.