[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Bhairitu wrote: You drink the kool-aid and I listen to people who actually worked on Vista. So, you bought a cheap Intel notebook with Vista on it, but I'm the one drinking the kool-aid. How do you like paying those double FICA taxes? ...if you were paying attention you would have learned that to make sure some software I've developed works on Vista I purchased a Vista notebook.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
...Microsoft Vista was designed from the bottom up for PlaysForSure and the WMA format; Bhairitu wrote: You drink the kool-aid and I listen to people who actually worked on Vista. If you listened to people who actually worked on Vista you probably wouldn't have rushed off to Best Buy to purchase Windows Vista Home Edition to install on your old laptop with 512MB of RAM. And for what purpose? You could probably back up your entire hard drive on a single floppy diskette.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Richard J. Williams wrote: ...Microsoft Vista was designed from the bottom up for PlaysForSure and the WMA format; Bhairitu wrote: You drink the kool-aid and I listen to people who actually worked on Vista. If you listened to people who actually worked on Vista you probably wouldn't have rushed off to Best Buy to purchase Windows Vista Home Edition to install on your old laptop with 512MB of RAM. And for what purpose? You could probably back up your entire hard drive on a single floppy diskette. No, if you were paying attention you would have learned that to make sure some software I've developed works on Vista I purchased a Vista notebook. Not what I wanted to do but it was necessary to verify the software ran. I also needed an extra notebook for another project. Except for the low memory which is easily fixed by adding another 512 mb for $40 the notebook was a good bargain. Unlike many users I don't use a notebook as my everyday machine, just mainly for traveling so I don't even need a power notebook.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
TurquoiseB wrote: ...(for example, Microsoft Word and Outlook) in 2 Mb of memory (Microsoft's claimed minimum memory requirement for Vista)... Don't try this at home - Windows Vista needs 2GB of RAM and works best on a dual core processor. This pandering to the copyright barons is also the thing that has crippled Windows Vista, because Microsoft capitulated to it. From what I hear, the moment you launch any of its multimedia utilities, the memory requirements of the operating system double, and sometimes triple if you're trying to play HD. I read one review/test of Vista in which the tester was unable to run more than two other programs (for example, Microsoft Word and Outlook) in 2 Mb of memory (Microsoft's claimed minimum memory requirement for Vista) when the OS went into its protect Microsoft from copyright infringement suits mode. They have effectively crippled their OS and passed the cost of the crippling (in the form of more memory being required) by giving in to the lawyers. When are the copyright owners going to learn that they're dealing with a frontier situation, and outlaws, and that heavy-handed attempts to intimidate the outlaws Just Aren't Going To Work? The outlaws understand the tech, and the entertainment industry lawyers do not. The outlaws are going to win every time, because they've got Righteous Indignation on their side. That and being 17 and having no assets that can be effectively seized. :-) My favorite attempt-at-copy-protection story is the short-lived scheme used by Sony corp. on its CDs. They spent several million bucks coming up with a copy-protection algorhythm that would prevent users from copying their CDs. The only trouble with it was that it actually *crashed* the users' computers when they tried to play the CDs on them. Big no-no, one that put the Righteous Indignation reaction into hyperdrive. Within a week, someone had figured out that the multi-million-dollar copy protection scheme could be defeated using a 49-cent Magic Marker pen. Simply use it to paint over the outside edge of the CD, and it played (and copied) just fine on any computer. No more crashes, no more copy protection. Sony abandoned the scheme. That's the way that all such copy protection schemes are going to be dealt with in the future. The hackers are smarter than the people creating the protection devices, and they're more motivated. The employees of the entertainment industry companies who invent these things are rewarded with (and thus motivated by) an industry-standard salary and a Dilbert cube that they can't even put up any of their photos of Elle Macpherson in. The hackers are motivated by Righteous Indignation, which doesn't pay as well in dollars, but pays off Big-Time in terms of satis- faction and peer approval. :-) Having worked on the peripheries of the music and film industry at one point in my life, I have to admit that I don't have a lot of compassion for the companies who are screaming about being ripped off by pirates. They've been Long John Silver to their artists for decades now, ripping off the very people who create their product every way they can possibly imagine. And now the karma has come home to roost. And about bloody time, in my opinion. I've known musicians who sold over a million dollars worth of product and who got a *bill* from their record companies for the album. The smarmy lawyers of the record companies had found a way to pass all of *their* expenses onto the band, and make them pay the company for the privilege of having made money for them. Same with some small films. So do I feel bad about these entertainment industry remoras losing a few bucks from pirates who take advantage of this authorization code being spread around on the Internet? I do not. When they start treating the talent that pays for their Porsches with a little more respect, I'll have more respect for them. Until then, I'm siding with the pirates. Ho ho ho, pass the bottle of rum, and plop that HD copy of Pirates Of The Caribbean At World's End into that Linux machine. Party time. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, vajradhatu108 vajranatha@ wrote: 09 F9: A Simple Way to Stand Up Against the Latest Assault on Digital Rights By Annalee Newitz, AlterNet Posted on May 22, 2007 I have a number, and therefore I am a free person. That's the message more than a million protesters across the Internet have been broadcasting throughout the month of May as they publish 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0, the 128-bit number familiarly known as 09 F9. Why would so many people create MySpace accounts using this number, devote a Wikipedia entry to it, post it thousands of times on news-finding site Digg, share pictures of it on photo site Flickr, and emblazon it on T-shirts? They're doing it to protest kids being threatened with jail by
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Bhairitu wrote: Windows Vista was built from the bottom up for DRM. You need to get some smarts, Barry - Microsoft Vista was designed from the bottom up for PlaysForSure and the WMA format; DRM is a media company protocol. PC World: Microsoft's Live Anywhere vision, laid out by Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates in May at the E3 gaming conference, calls for consumers to be able to use a common user interface on Windows Vista PCs and Windows Mobile devices as well as the Xbox 360 console. 'Live Anywhere Adds Platform' By Stephen Lawson PC World, Friday, June 02, 2006 http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,125954-page,1/article.html?RSS=RSS
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard J. Williams Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:24 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Bhairitu wrote: Windows Vista was built from the bottom up for DRM. You need to get some smarts, Barry - Microsoft Vista was designed from the bottom up for PlaysForSure and the WMA format; DRM is a media company protocol. I don't even know what these acronyms mean, but I upgraded my PC to Vista and I like it a lot. I have 4 GB of RAM and 2 250 GB HDs. The transition was smooth. A small challenge updating the driver for a PCI card and getting it to work with my 11-year-old Apple LaserWriter 16/600, but a friend solved that.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Richard J. Williams wrote: Bhairitu wrote: Windows Vista was built from the bottom up for DRM. You need to get some smarts, Barry - Microsoft Vista was designed from the bottom up for PlaysForSure and the WMA format; DRM is a media company protocol. PC World: Microsoft's Live Anywhere vision, laid out by Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates in May at the E3 gaming conference, calls for consumers to be able to use a common user interface on Windows Vista PCs and Windows Mobile devices as well as the Xbox 360 console. 'Live Anywhere Adds Platform' By Stephen Lawson PC World, Friday, June 02, 2006 http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,125954-page,1/article.html?RSS=RSS You drink the kool-aid and I listen to people who actually worked on Vista.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Rick Archer wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard J. Williams Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:24 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Bhairitu wrote: Windows Vista was built from the bottom up for DRM. You need to get some smarts, Barry - Microsoft Vista was designed from the bottom up for PlaysForSure and the WMA format; DRM is a media company protocol. I don't even know what these acronyms mean, but I upgraded my PC to Vista and I like it a lot. I have 4 GB of RAM and 2 250 GB HDs. The transition was smooth. A small challenge updating the driver for a PCI card and getting it to work with my 11-year-old Apple LaserWriter 16/600, but a friend solved that. You probably don't use it like I do plus having been a publishing director for a software company see the gaffs they've make in the product. Microsoft is a constant battle of egos and the public suffers but then I do not support the concept of having one corporation own the principal computer operating system the world uses. That's a disaster waiting to happen and worse than having Diebold make most of the voting machine. Microsoft sees Linux as a big threat and is accusing the Linux makers of violating over 200 patents probably ones that shouldn't have been granted in the first place. They also see flavors of Linux getting more and more user friendly and companies who had proprietary drivers open sourcing them so they can be used with Linux. DRM stands for Digital Rights Management. This is an overly complex system to keep people from putting unlicensed content on your computer or basically making sure the entertainment companies can charge you again for something you already bought. I may also get in the way of you editing or displaying video you've shot yourself. I did have a surprise messing around with my notebook while my networked DVD player was on as Vista asked me if I wanted to allow the player to access it. I did and it played content on the notebook without installing the player's own server software. I had no success trying to get the Microsoft stuff to work on an XP with the player even though the Microsoft software showed it was allowed too. Now I will have to try their HD sample clips that are DRM'd for testing purposes. WMA is their audio format and WMV is their video format. Those are kind of both second tier to MP3 and MPEG-4 though. Microsoft has yet to release an efficient WMV encoder.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Great article, great protest. This pandering to the copyright barons is also the thing that has crippled Windows Vista, because Microsoft capitulated to it. From what I hear, the moment you launch any of its multimedia utilities, the memory requirements of the operating system double, and sometimes triple if you're trying to play HD. I read one review/test of Vista in which the tester was unable to run more than two other programs (for example, Microsoft Word and Outlook) in 2 Mb of memory (Microsoft's claimed minimum memory requirement for Vista) when the OS went into its protect Microsoft from copyright infringement suits mode. They have effectively crippled their OS and passed the cost of the crippling (in the form of more memory being required) by giving in to the lawyers. When are the copyright owners going to learn that they're dealing with a frontier situation, and outlaws, and that heavy-handed attempts to intimidate the outlaws Just Aren't Going To Work? The outlaws understand the tech, and the entertainment industry lawyers do not. The outlaws are going to win every time, because they've got Righteous Indignation on their side. That and being 17 and having no assets that can be effectively seized. :-) My favorite attempt-at-copy-protection story is the short-lived scheme used by Sony corp. on its CDs. They spent several million bucks coming up with a copy-protection algorhythm that would prevent users from copying their CDs. The only trouble with it was that it actually *crashed* the users' computers when they tried to play the CDs on them. Big no-no, one that put the Righteous Indignation reaction into hyperdrive. Within a week, someone had figured out that the multi-million-dollar copy protection scheme could be defeated using a 49-cent Magic Marker pen. Simply use it to paint over the outside edge of the CD, and it played (and copied) just fine on any computer. No more crashes, no more copy protection. Sony abandoned the scheme. That's the way that all such copy protection schemes are going to be dealt with in the future. The hackers are smarter than the people creating the protection devices, and they're more motivated. The employees of the entertainment industry companies who invent these things are rewarded with (and thus motivated by) an industry-standard salary and a Dilbert cube that they can't even put up any of their photos of Elle Macpherson in. The hackers are motivated by Righteous Indignation, which doesn't pay as well in dollars, but pays off Big-Time in terms of satis- faction and peer approval. :-) Having worked on the peripheries of the music and film industry at one point in my life, I have to admit that I don't have a lot of compassion for the companies who are screaming about being ripped off by pirates. They've been Long John Silver to their artists for decades now, ripping off the very people who create their product every way they can possibly imagine. And now the karma has come home to roost. And about bloody time, in my opinion. I've known musicians who sold over a million dollars worth of product and who got a *bill* from their record companies for the album. The smarmy lawyers of the record companies had found a way to pass all of *their* expenses onto the band, and make them pay the company for the privilege of having made money for them. Same with some small films. So do I feel bad about these entertainment industry remoras losing a few bucks from pirates who take advantage of this authorization code being spread around on the Internet? I do not. When they start treating the talent that pays for their Porsches with a little more respect, I'll have more respect for them. Until then, I'm siding with the pirates. Ho ho ho, pass the bottle of rum, and plop that HD copy of Pirates Of The Caribbean At World's End into that Linux machine. Party time. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, vajradhatu108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 09 F9: A Simple Way to Stand Up Against the Latest Assault on Digital Rights By Annalee Newitz, AlterNet Posted on May 22, 2007 I have a number, and therefore I am a free person. That's the message more than a million protesters across the Internet have been broadcasting throughout the month of May as they publish 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0, the 128-bit number familiarly known as 09 F9. Why would so many people create MySpace accounts using this number, devote a Wikipedia entry to it, post it thousands of times on news-finding site Digg, share pictures of it on photo site Flickr, and emblazon it on T-shirts? They're doing it to protest kids being threatened with jail by entertainment companies. They're doing it to protest bad art, bad business, and bad uses of good technology. They're doing it because they want to watch Spider-Man 3 on their Linux machines. In case you don't know, 09 F9 is part of a key that unlocks the encryption codes on HD-DVD and Blu-ray DVDs. Only a
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I've copywritten many a piece, and it saved my ass bigtime in one instance when material of mine was wholly ripped off and used on a Web site -- for profit -- $54,000's worth as it turned out. Because I had a copyright, the thief incurred a risk of much larger penalties than he would have faced otherwise -- civil law allows for multiples of the profits as a proscribed penalty. That big penalty, once he finally grasped what risk he faced, forced him to reconsider his position in a three year long lawsuit, and he's now asking for an out of court settlement. Without that copyright clout, my civil suit against the guy would have much less of a penalty being possibly exacted against him, and he would have held out much longer before coming to the settlement table. Because of this experience, I'm grateful for the copyright laws. That said: here's a suggestion to all artists: give it all away for free until you have a following. If you can't get a following, then you don't have what the market wants, so keep your day job. If you do get a following, have those folks sign up to an opt-in list that gets them the privilege of being the first to get your fresh new stuff for a price. Yes, they can then give your new stuff away after purchase, but they will want your stuff fresh-as-possible, so much that, if they have the bucks, they'll buy it when it comes hot off the griddle just to get their fix. Those that can wait, will get your stuff from the buyers down the line when those buyers post your stuff on the Web. See? If one really has chops, there will be a paying audience who want that next blast from you NOW. And this can be done direct -- P2P -- with no agents or broadcasters or media vampires involved. The artist sells to his core audience, and the rest of the world gets it for free -- which is advertising for the next roll out of stuff. Providing your stuff for free in a degraded form (smaller file size) will give everyone a taste, and invite them to purchase the full pleasure. E.g., Put your stuff on youtube.com and cuz it's so crappy a display, folks will pay for the bigger files with the visual and audio details that youtube.com crunches out of existence. The opt-in list will grow. Yes, this means an artist must continually put out more, but that's what any artist would do for funzies if he/she is a true artist, right? Then, if one really has a following, a concert will be sold out, a gallery's display will be well visited, etc. Now, I do have a problem with the heirs of material. John Wayne's family is still making healthy buckzoids from licensing his image, and I cannot find myself wanting that to stop -- I have kids that I want to leave my creations to, ya see? So, the Duke's family have a legitimate gripe if someone is diluting the value of his image by over-use which will decrease how much is paid by a commercial interest in the material. I think that if anyone makes more than a few bucks off my stuff, they should pay a royalty at least. Maybe as a compromise, we could allow general use of all material, but if money is being made, then the copyright laws click in. If people get tired of seeing John Wayne in youtube vids, then so be it. John Wayne's family needs to make hay while the sun shines. On the other hand, I don't create anything, and I'm thieving from God, so who am I to try to control how the stuff that flows through me is used by God in the other nervous systems out there? Can't justify it on my good days, but when I finally get that lawsuit cleared up, I'll be sure to cash the check instead of, you know, giving to one of God's charities. SighI don't have clarity about all this. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great article, great protest. This pandering to the copyright barons is also the thing that has crippled Windows Vista, because Microsoft capitulated to it. From what I hear, the moment you launch any of its multimedia utilities, the memory requirements of the operating system double, and sometimes triple if you're trying to play HD. I read one review/test of Vista in which the tester was unable to run more than two other programs (for example, Microsoft Word and Outlook) in 2 Mb of memory (Microsoft's claimed minimum memory requirement for Vista) when the OS went into its protect Microsoft from copyright infringement suits mode. They have effectively crippled their OS and passed the cost of the crippling (in the form of more memory being required) by giving in to the lawyers. When are the copyright owners going to learn that they're dealing with a frontier situation, and outlaws, and that heavy-handed attempts to intimidate the outlaws Just Aren't Going To Work? The outlaws understand the tech, and the entertainment industry lawyers do not. The outlaws are going to win every time, because they've got Righteous Indignation on their side. That and being 17 and
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Windows Vista was built from the bottom up for DRM. It is a very bad mistake and will probably get a worse reputation than Windows ME. It doesn't even work the same way as previous versions of Windows. What the hell were they thinking? People will return new computers in droves. When on idle my notebook which granted only has the minimal 512 MB which is required to run Vista has only 7 MB free! I will be replacing that memory chip with a 1 GB chip instead. The machine slogs around due to constantly needing to use virtual memory that it runs as slow as a Linux Live CD will run (actually Linux Mint Bianca which is based on Ubuntu but includes the multimedia support that Ubuntu does not runs faster as a Live CD than Vista on the same notebook). The funny thing is this notebook, due to being dual core encodes HD files in Divx faster than my desktop with XP Pro and a 3.4 ghz CPU! Granted I've got a lot of data mining to do to get rid of so many things to make the notebook run sane. There is way too much hand-holding and I often get to see a cryptic insufficient quota message on it when I try to move large files across the network. I have never seen that one before on a Windows system. Microsoft deserves to loose big time for putting such a piece of crap on the market. I work and continue to work in the entertainment industry. I can vouch for the fact that most all the record companies and film companies are run by scum. Executives of either never actually understand how the technology they are delivering their goods with work. All they care about is making buttloads of money so they can by that new mansion in Tahiti or Boeing private jet. Compare that with the software industry that when the web started to break out embraced it as a new means of distribution. How many years has the DVD encryption system been broken and yet they are still making buttloads of money on their movies many of which are crap? Why should they worry about HD-DVD copy protection being broken? I have also published stuff that is copyrighted and have even had it pirated. But you'd think that most of the copies of stuff the entertainment stuffed shirts are concerned about make up the majority of the market instead a small insignificant number. Then we have the government which sucking up to these industries passes such draconian laws that if you made a copy of a TV show for a friend while they were on vacation that they want to give you more prison time than if you murdered somebody. Totally absurd. I guess they think they need some more inmates for these privatized prisons they are building. It's time for American Revolution II and I don't mean a Fox reality series. TurquoiseB wrote: Great article, great protest. This pandering to the copyright barons is also the thing that has crippled Windows Vista, because Microsoft capitulated to it. From what I hear, the moment you launch any of its multimedia utilities, the memory requirements of the operating system double, and sometimes triple if you're trying to play HD. I read one review/test of Vista in which the tester was unable to run more than two other programs (for example, Microsoft Word and Outlook) in 2 Mb of memory (Microsoft's claimed minimum memory requirement for Vista) when the OS went into its protect Microsoft from copyright infringement suits mode. They have effectively crippled their OS and passed the cost of the crippling (in the form of more memory being required) by giving in to the lawyers. When are the copyright owners going to learn that they're dealing with a frontier situation, and outlaws, and that heavy-handed attempts to intimidate the outlaws Just Aren't Going To Work? The outlaws understand the tech, and the entertainment industry lawyers do not. The outlaws are going to win every time, because they've got Righteous Indignation on their side. That and being 17 and having no assets that can be effectively seized. :-) My favorite attempt-at-copy-protection story is the short-lived scheme used by Sony corp. on its CDs. They spent several million bucks coming up with a copy-protection algorhythm that would prevent users from copying their CDs. The only trouble with it was that it actually *crashed* the users' computers when they tried to play the CDs on them. Big no-no, one that put the Righteous Indignation reaction into hyperdrive. Within a week, someone had figured out that the multi-million-dollar copy protection scheme could be defeated using a 49-cent Magic Marker pen. Simply use it to paint over the outside edge of the CD, and it played (and copied) just fine on any computer. No more crashes, no more copy protection. Sony abandoned the scheme. That's the way that all such copy protection schemes are going to be dealt with in the future. The hackers are smarter than the people creating the protection devices, and they're more
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great article, great protest. Having worked on the peripheries of the music and film industry at one point in my life, I have to admit that I don't have a lot of compassion for the companies who are screaming about being ripped off by pirates. They've been Long John Silver to their artists for decades now, ripping off the very people who create their product every way they can possibly imagine. And now the karma has come home to roost. And about bloody time, in my opinion. I've known musicians who sold over a million dollars worth of product and who got a *bill* from their record companies for the album. The smarmy lawyers of the record companies had found a way to pass all of *their* expenses onto the band, and make them pay the company for the privilege of having made money for them. I just saw a segment on TV about how popular bands are now doing all of their marketing, publishing and distribution by themselves because of the obvious economic benefit. The show featured a band, Wilco, who said that instead of a record company contract that would pay them $1 per CD, by outsourcing these functions and managing them themselves, they were now realizing $6 per CD. That's a big difference. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Great article, great protest. Having worked on the peripheries of the music and film industry at one point in my life, I have to admit that I don't have a lot of compassion for the companies who are screaming about being ripped off by pirates. They've been Long John Silver to their artists for decades now, ripping off the very people who create their product every way they can possibly imagine. And now the karma has come home to roost. And about bloody time, in my opinion. I've known musicians who sold over a million dollars worth of product and who got a *bill* from their record companies for the album. The smarmy lawyers of the record companies had found a way to pass all of *their* expenses onto the band, and make them pay the company for the privilege of having made money for them. I just saw a segment on TV about how popular bands are now doing all of their marketing, publishing and distribution by themselves because of the obvious economic benefit. The show featured a band, Wilco, who said that instead of a record company contract that would pay them $1 per CD, by outsourcing these functions and managing them themselves, they were now realizing $6 per CD. That's a big difference. :-) ...and I don't understand why book authors aren't doing the same things as bands and self-publishing. A typical book at Barnes and Noble -- or online for that matter -- runs $19.95. Like the per CD residual paid to musicians as shown above, authors get about $1.00 per book sold. But if authors self-publish, they can do it EVEN IN SMALL QUANTITIES for about $1.25 per book (soft cover, of course). Sure, they'd have to market it themselves but they'd be getting about 15-20 times more profit per book than if they did it through a publishing house. Why aren't more doing it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: snip I just saw a segment on TV about how popular bands are now doing all of their marketing, publishing and distribution by themselves because of the obvious economic benefit. The show featured a band, Wilco, who said that instead of a record company contract that would pay them $1 per CD, by outsourcing these functions and managing them themselves, they were now realizing $6 per CD. That's a big difference. :-) ...and I don't understand why book authors aren't doing the same things as bands and self-publishing. A typical book at Barnes and Noble -- or online for that matter -- runs $19.95. Like the per CD residual paid to musicians as shown above, authors get about $1.00 per book sold. But if authors self-publish, they can do it EVEN IN SMALL QUANTITIES for about $1.25 per book (soft cover, of course). Sure, they'd have to market it themselves but they'd be getting about 15-20 times more profit per book than if they did it through a publishing house. Why aren't more doing it? Marketing and distribution are both very difficult for self-published books. Many of the publications that still do book reviews won't consider self- published books (the vanity press stigma is still a factor). Plus which, it's a *huge* job to self- publish a book and do it right (as opposed to trusting a company like iUniverse), as well as a very substantial financial investment. And doing the marketing yourself is just about a full-time job. Despite the obstacles, however, self-publishing is very much on the rise. If you can make it work, the rewards are great.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Great article, great protest. Having worked on the peripheries of the music and film industry at one point in my life, I have to admit that I don't have a lot of compassion for the companies who are screaming about being ripped off by pirates. They've been Long John Silver to their artists for decades now, ripping off the very people who create their product every way they can possibly imagine. And now the karma has come home to roost. And about bloody time, in my opinion. I've known musicians who sold over a million dollars worth of product and who got a *bill* from their record companies for the album. The smarmy lawyers of the record companies had found a way to pass all of *their* expenses onto the band, and make them pay the company for the privilege of having made money for them. I just saw a segment on TV about how popular bands are now doing all of their marketing, publishing and distribution by themselves because of the obvious economic benefit. The show featured a band, Wilco, who said that instead of a record company contract that would pay them $1 per CD, by outsourcing these functions and managing them themselves, they were now realizing $6 per CD. That's a big difference. :-) ...and I don't understand why book authors aren't doing the same things as bands and self-publishing. A typical book at Barnes and Noble -- or online for that matter -- runs $19.95. Like the per CD residual paid to musicians as shown above, authors get about $1.00 per book sold. But if authors self-publish, they can do it EVEN IN SMALL QUANTITIES for about $1.25 per book (soft cover, of course). Sure, they'd have to market it themselves but they'd be getting about 15-20 times more profit per book than if they did it through a publishing house. Why aren't more doing it? Since books are still bought in brick and mortar stores, maybe its a matter of the big book sellers not buying indie published books...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: Great article, great protest. Having worked on the peripheries of the music and film industry at one point in my life, I have to admit that I don't have a lot of compassion for the companies who are screaming about being ripped off by pirates. They've been Long John Silver to their artists for decades now, ripping off the very people who create their product every way they can possibly imagine. And now the karma has come home to roost. And about bloody time, in my opinion. I've known musicians who sold over a million dollars worth of product and who got a *bill* from their record companies for the album. The smarmy lawyers of the record companies had found a way to pass all of *their* expenses onto the band, and make them pay the company for the privilege of having made money for them. I just saw a segment on TV about how popular bands are now doing all of their marketing, publishing and distribution by themselves because of the obvious economic benefit. The show featured a band, Wilco, who said that instead of a record company contract that would pay them $1 per CD, by outsourcing these functions and managing them themselves, they were now realizing $6 per CD. That's a big difference. :-) ...and I don't understand why book authors aren't doing the same things as bands and self-publishing. A typical book at Barnes and Noble -- or online for that matter -- runs $19.95. Like the per CD residual paid to musicians as shown above, authors get about $1.00 per book sold. But if authors self-publish, they can do it EVEN IN SMALL QUANTITIES for about $1.25 per book (soft cover, of course). Sure, they'd have to market it themselves but they'd be getting about 15-20 times more profit per book than if they did it through a publishing house. Why aren't more doing it? I have a friend who did and wound up with a garage full of books. :) His mistake? Not taking it a book at a time. For some reason he felt he had to publish a whole line of books whereas I would have suggested starting with one and see how it goes then from the mistakes made in the first avoid those in the second for a better book. As for the marketing and distribution he had some good angles on that but the books needed to be better and more innovative (they were non-fiction).
