Andrew Bowden wrote:
That means they won't come to my DVD store [2]. Boo!
They might never have come though.
Pah, you just want them coming in to your online DVD rental store :)
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit
The claim is mostly inaccurate because it presupposes that
the friendwould otherwise have bought a copy from the DVD
store. That isoccasionally true, but more often false; and
when it is false, theclaimed loss does not occur.
As people are taking my attempt at humour seriously, I'll have
The media producers are clearly getting a free lunch here,
they can sell the same thing again and again, never having to
give up any of there own possessions but requiring others to
surrender their items in exchange.
Lord of the Rings. Three big budget films. How do you think they got
As this is the Backstage list, has anyone come up with a
widget to mash up the most ridiculous and rabid tirades from
this and other recent threads with Google maps to produce a
huge cloud of red map pins around Shoreditch?
Ooh, an archive mash-up! I like that idea :)
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andrew Bowden
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 9:18 AM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
The claim is mostly inaccurate because it presupposes that
the friendwould otherwise
this is a new micro media age? What's wrong with that?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andrew Bowden
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 9:29 AM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM
Yes, the industry model we have NOW may lose out on some sales, but there is
no reason why it can't develop and make a good profit using other
distribution channels and business models. I think we're in danger of trying
to deal with 21st century technology with 19th century thinking and laws.
Years ago, before PCs and printers, if people wanted anything
copied they had to go to the local shop or library where they
could use a photocopier.
And some of them doing photocopies which breached copyright law too :)
Today, they just use their own scanners and printers to make
their
: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
If a film company can't produce a film and make money from it
through its own distribution model, then in the end it will
stop making films. There are plenty of people who would like
to make money doing what they like, but can't find
Richard Lockwood wrote:
This is the argument that always crops up: Use a different business
model. I've yet to hear someone come up with a workable one. Giving
the end product away - and allowing everyone else to do the same - is
*not* a workable business model.
I wonder if there really is
On 01/03/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If a film company can't produce a film and make money from it
through its own distribution model, then in the end it will
stop making films. There are plenty of people who would like
to make money doing what they like, but can't find a way
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 28/02/07, Mario Menti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In just about every definition, loss can
mean being deprived of something, regardless of whether you physically
possessed that thing in the first place.
What loss are rights holders taking?
Loss of potential revenue
Dave Crossland wrote:
Consider why authors always cede their rights to publishers, and if
they would do this if it was indeed a natural right?
I thought that in certain countries (France springs to mind) you can't
really cede your copyright to publishers, as copyright really is a
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Deirdre Harvey
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:08 AM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
King Canute was just showing his men that even though he was the king,
he couldn't
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Deirdre Harvey
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:17 AM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
On 3/1/07, Scot McSweeney-Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I thought that in certain countries (France springs to mind) you can't
really cede your copyright to publishers, as copyright really is a
considered a natural right.
I think you might mean Moral Rights (the Droit Moral), as opposed
On 01/03/07, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, how do you propose to fund a multi-million pound film
in a different business model?
I don't propose funding a multi-million pound film, so it is
not my concern.
OK, so this isn't about ethics then, it's about dogmatic laissez-faire
Dave Crossland wrote:
On 01/03/07, Scot McSweeney-Roberts
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Crossland wrote:
Consider why authors always cede their rights to publishers, and if
they would do this if it was indeed a natural right?
I thought that in certain countries (France springs to mind) you
The film industry can still be financed. Yes, it may not have
as much money as it would if everyone had to pay something
every time they watched a film. But I don't have as much
money as if everyone had to pay me something every time they
read an email I wrote. The millions spent on film
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Crossland
Sent: 01 March 2007 10:59
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
But change is good.
For someone so enamoured
On 01/03/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But change is good.
Is it.
I think so. There are many rural communities than shun progress alot,
and a few like the Amish that do a lot. I like change, because in
change there is opportunity :-)
I can't see Lord of the Rings ever getting
On 01/03/07, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But change is good.
For someone so enamoured of accusing everyone of having hidden
assumptions you are finding it pretty easy to ignore the huge assumption
at the centre of your argument.
Please explain what you think this is :-)
I
Harvey
Sent: 27 February 2007 13:10
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
fair point (although the Welsh argument is a canard), but there is a
difference between creating content for a new channel, albeit one that
is not available
On a related DRM tip, I just thought I'd chip in with some comments my
wife made last night. We download podcasts from the BBC, and from
Virgin Radio (thanks Mr Cridland!), but obviously it is all talk
related, not full track music content.
My wife asked me Are there any podcasts from XFM or
On 28/02/07, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is there a way you could implement it that doesn't
compromise the public at the expense of the people with the temporary
monopoly rights?
There is a hidden assumption here: that the monopolists are elevated
to the same level of importance
On 28/02/07, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wouldn't care if I could only listen to it once and it just blew up
Separating fools from their freedom is wrong. The fact that the fools
participate voluntarily does not excuse it. DRM is a predatory
scheme that creates subjugation. Even
-Original Message-
From: Deirdre Harvey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 28 February 2007 12:32
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
If there's a demand for that kind of service,
is there a way you could implement
On 28/02/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It never set out to make them happy: It set out to give them freedom.
Who would have thought a conversation about the concept of people
watching TopGear a couple of days late could end up at this melodramatic
line?
Who would have thought
On 28/02/07, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't think of a workable solution
yeah, me neither. so is it ok to say to someone you can't have what you
want because even though it's technically possible it is not ethically
possible? I don't know.
Please explain why permitting the
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 28/02/07, Deirdre Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't think of a workable solution
yeah, me neither. so is it ok to say to someone you can't
have what
you want because even though it's technically possible it is not
ethically possible? I don't know.
Anyone who understands the rights and commercial impact issues.
J
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Crossland
Sent: 28 February 2007 13:48
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards
Andrew Bowden wrote:
That means they won't come to my DVD store [2]. Boo!
They might never have come though.
--
Kirk
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
Can someone explain how copyright itself is ethical?
Maybe I should explain why it is in itself immoral.
Why do things cost money? What is the purpose of price?
Economics would say Price is used to distribute scarce resources
Where a scarce resource is one which has a finite limit.
This
On 2/28/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The claim is partly misleading because the word loss suggests events of
a very different nature--events in which something they have is taken away
from them. For example, if the store's stock of DVDs were burned, or if the
money in the till
On 28/02/07, Mario Menti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In just about every definition, loss can
mean being deprived of something, regardless of whether you physically
possessed that thing in the first place.
What loss are rights holders taking?
--
Regards,
Dave
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk
_
From: Mario Menti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 28 February 2007 22:59
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
On 2/28/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The claim is partly misleading because the word loss
I would like to know what percentage of my license fee will
go towards funding the proposed iPlayer services which are
only to be made available to people stupid enough to be using
Windows - so that I can withhold that amount from my payment,
or seek a refund of that amount back from the
Jim Gardner wrote:
I would like to know what percentage of my license fee will go
towards funding the proposed iPlayer services which are only to be
made available to people stupid enough to be using Windows
Are you certain Microsoft isn't funding it? I thought most of the
Windows Media
On 27/02/07, Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is all my personal point of view.
I can't receive digital TV, so I'd like a refund on money spent to make
BBC3 and BBC4. Oh, and I can't read welsh so could TV Licencing please
send me a cheque for the money spend on
I would like to know what percentage of my license fee will
go towards funding the proposed iPlayer services which are
only to be made available to people stupid enough to be using
Windows - so that I can withhold that amount from my payment,
or seek a refund of that amount back from the
Jason Cartwright wrote:
Oh, and I can't read welsh so could TV Licencing please
send me a cheque for the money spend on http://www.bbc.co.uk/cymru/
Well, the pop-up Oes gennych chi 5 munud i roi eich barn am y safle hwn?
(Have you got 5 minutes to fill in a survey on this site, or similar)
Jason Cartwright wrote:
This is all my personal point of view.
I can't receive digital TV, so I'd like a refund on money spent to make
BBC3 and BBC4. Oh, and I can't read welsh so could TV Licencing please
send me a cheque for the money spend on http://www.bbc.co.uk/cymru/
Didn't some
On 27/02/07, Jim Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to know what percentage of my license fee will go
towards funding the proposed iPlayer services which are only to be
made available to people stupid enough to be using Windows - so that
I can withhold that amount from my payment, or
I would like to know what percentage of my license fee will go
towards funding the proposed iPlayer services which are only to be
made available to people stupid enough to be using Windows - so that
I can withhold that amount from my payment, or seek a refund of that
amount back from the BBC.
I would like to I would like to know what percentage of my license fee
will go towards funding of Seb Potter's employment - so that
I can withhold that amount from my payment, or seek a refund of that
amount back from the BBC.
;-)
Seb Potter wrote:
On 27/02/07, *Jim Gardner* [EMAIL
February 2007 13:20
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
Seb Potter wrote:
Are you a BT customer? If so, you could try to demand a refund of the
part of your line rental that goes towards providing phone boxes for
those people
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neil
Aberdeen
Sent: 27 February 2007 13:41
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
I would like to I would like to know what
] On Behalf Of Jim Gardner
Sent: 27 February 2007 13:52
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
It would appear from this and other mails I've received that
I have the same name as someone who has a track record for trolling.
I can assure
Kenneth Burrell-CAPITA wrote:
Hi
Which is like paying income tax for Health Service and then having to
pay for prescriptions? ...
I can choose to go to Boots, or Tesco or one of any number of small
chemists to get the prescription. I'm not forced into going to a single
chemist, which
It would appear from this and other mails I've received that I have
the same name as someone who has a track record for trolling.
I can assure everyone on the list that this is the first thread this
James Gardner has started or replied to on the backstage mailing
list, and given the less
But then, both of those methods still leave the question -
how do you pay for the unpopular, but worthy, programming?
PPV - you split the programme budget between the expected number of
viewers. As such, EastEnders being a programme with many viewers, would
cost less than a documentary on
Aberdeen
Sent: 27 February 2007 13:41
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
I would like to I would like to know what percentage of my license
fee will go towards funding of Seb Potter's employment - so that
I can withhold that amount
Yes even the ones that that harp on
about DRM noon and night ;)
Actually the DRM discussions in recent weeks have been incredibly
stimulating and provocative and much appreciated inside BBC towers and I
hope for other subscribers. (I always knew I shouldn't try and make weak
jokes on
On 27/02/07, Jim Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Being fairly new to the list I can only imagine that this DRM thing
has dragged on a bit for some of the older members, but I would
remind everyone that it's pretty much universally agreed that this is
the biggest mistake the BBC have ever made -
On 27/02/07, John Drinkwater [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got similar comments from someone else off-list related to comments
i've made here and on the BBC editors site.
I'm sorry to hear that - I've been quite vocal about my non-mainstream
opinions, and never received such comments.
--
George Wright wrote:
On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 18:09 +, Jim Gardner wrote:
I'm sure Microsoft are desperately pleased with themselves for
earning what ever percentage of that £131 million is theirs
Programme ingest, programme creation, programme/contributor rights,
content
I never did understand keyboard heros. The fact is, if we where
talking face to face in the pub, you wouldn't dream of being so
obnoxious just because you think I'm wrong. Just because you can't
counter my argument with anything doesn't give you the right to
resort to the fail-safe, I've
I would've hoped that the BBC listserver either washes those kind of emails
or returns them to sender.
-Original Message-
From: Jim Gardner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 February 2007 19:20
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going
] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
On 27/02/07, James Ockenden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
pay for your email service, you fucking tightwad, and you might have a
vaguely moral place from which to make your tiny cock point.
The list's House Rules are simple: Be Nice To Each Other and Don't
Break
Hi welcome to the list Jim,
Can I suggest you lurk a little more before posting more.
It tends to be bad form to complain at such a early stage :)
Cheers,
Ian Forrester
Jim Gardner wrote:
I'm not exactly over-the-moon about the idea that everyone's private
email address is visible. What
60 matches
Mail list logo
