Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1549531" data-attributes="member: 10201">Another factor that may come into play is the very reputations of the music industry producers themselves. Frex, if a new group came out that i really liked, and they were released on the Sony label, i probably wouldn't buy it. I'm particularly pissed off at Sony right now for their stupid copy protection scheme that makes CDs unplayable in computers--for most of my CD-player-owning life, my only CD player has been a computer, and my primary CD player has always been my computer. But i've almost never ripped CDs i own--didn't even have the capability until a bit over a year ago--and the only time i've copied a few tracks off of them was for putting together a soundtrack for a game campaign. Making legitimate users unable to use your product in legitimate ways is not good copy protection. And the fact that it was so easily circumvented just makes it that much more ridiculous--now the legitimate user can't use the CD without doing something illegal (DMCA: even talking about how to circumvent copy-protection technologies is illegal, much less doing so, regardless of the purpose for which you do so), while the pirate can trivially circumvent the protection anyway. So, if a new band turned up that i really loved, i would choose to do without before i'd buy it--there's always the radio. Or, i might download at least a few tracks (probably not teh whole album, but out of laziness rather than moral imperative). But, even if i think the price is reasonable for the degree to which i like the music, i'm not gonna support some of the big producers--put the identical CD out on a different label, even at a higher price, and i'll buy. Whether it's logical or not. Then again, i also bought Aqua's first album (the one with Barbie Girl on it) only because of Mattel's lawsuit against them. Sure, i enjoyed the song, but not badly enough to buy it. Then i heard about the lawsuit. I looked around for the single for a while, but nobody had it. $20 for one song wasn't reasonable. $20 to get one song and thumb my nose at a foolish, hypocritical, frivolous lawsuit, and maybe give the victims of teh lawsuit a little more money, was perfectly reasonable. So i bought the full album. I'm just upset with myself that i never got around to writing Mattel that letter, pointing out that "Barbie Girl" wasn't gonna do any damage to the image of Barbie that Mattel hadn't already done, and all their lawsuit was doing was making the song more popular. I wonder if there's any point, now?</blockquote>

Verification