Posts by Mark Harris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
This is one that springs to mind
And another
-
To listen to or to fall into bed with?</innocent>
-
IMHO She assumed that Auckland Central would continue voting for her as of right, so she never bothered to look after them (according to a number of people I know who live in AC and are/were Labour supporters). It appears they found her arrogant.
-
@Kyle
Which, as you say, is not about copyright but about traffic costs. But it does illustrate the problem with trying to apply a technical solution to a total problem. And that was why the technician laughed.If you had been torrenting a movie or the latest album by someone an old fart like me has never heard of, it would have inconvenienced you momentarily, but you found a way round it so it's hardly a good way of preventing piracy, is it?
-
I blame the new gummint, meself
-
I'm only taking your position from the things you've said on this thread
And on the other thread, I meant to say. Sorry
-
I'm only taking your position from the things you've said on this thread. You've run the same industry line that file-sharing is hurting sales. You've provided no evidence, as the industry provides no evidence. How is it then a false assumption to assume that you support the industry groups on this?
Anecdotes != evidence. You've provided no evidence of the scale of the alleged problem, the amount of money that has been lost, the causal link between file-sharing and industry downturn (after record high years), or any bands that have actually lost money.
Without verifiable facts, all you are offering is personal opinion. Which is fine, if you don't try to say it's a fact.
The data I provided happens to coincide with the period in which the industry groups started to blame file-sharing for killing the music industry - it is relevant, but it doesn't coincide with your 'facts' (admittedly unscientific - thank you for that, at least) so you call it out-dated and ignore it.
Given that the industry groups are equating file-sharing, piracy and counterfeiting in general, it's quite appropriate to look at material that calls bullshit on the estimates and methodolgy that these groups use to justify their stance on "intellectual property". I didn't make the connection, they do, every time they use the figures.
If it's not your industry, as I said above, then sure, it's not down to you to sort it out. But, if you're making the claims independently of the industry bodies, it's down to you to back them up with facts, not your understanding that your daughter's generation doesn't believe it's stealing to download tracks. I've got some news for you - plenty of other people don't believe it either, from all generations. Whether they're right or wrong, it doesn't demonstrate a causal relationship between file-sharing and the music industry downturn.
You've not made a case at all, merely stated your beliefs.
-
And I'm putting words in your mouth, eh? As a matter of interest, I continued watching the thread; I merely stopped responding to you or robbery as neither of you were prepared to accept that alternative viewpoints may be valid. You at least engaged, but robbery merely changed the subject when confronted with things he couldn't or wouldn't answer, plus his ignorant abuse of other participants in the thread. Now, what would be the point of staying around for more of the same?
Simon, if you're not part of the industry, then it's not your job, I accept that. But if you consider that you are part of the industry, then managing the industry body, influencing its policies and activities, is very much your partial responsibility. I can't imagine you'll turn down any benefits they might make for industry members.
But if you quote their cant, for which they and you have provided NO proof (i.e. that file-sharing has had a deleterious effect on the music industry), then expect to be seen as a part of the industry and so part of the problem.
Instead of responding to the matters I raised, in that thread you refer to above, you dismissed any evidence that runs against your statements as out of date or irrelevant, but you provide nothing that substantiates the view that file-sharing has damaged the music industry.
So here's the challenge, Simon: Show some evidence that this has occurred, and I mean solid evidence that the industry has directly suffered from file-sharing, that labels have gone out of business because of file-sharing, that bands have gone out of business - let's see some names, dates and figures, not anecdotes that your daughter doesn't think it's wrong. I have no doubt that she thinks that way, but you seem to be working from the base idea that she is wrong. What if she is right and you are wrong? Is that a possibility you can entertain?
Oh, and please provide evidence of the "false assumptions" in my previous post, or I shall have to consider it as unwarrented abuse, which I've come to expect from robbery, but not you.
-
That, I guess, is an 'I don't know' statement.
And you would guess incorrectly. But when did you become robbery's keeper?
-
@Simon Grigg
If you don't want to be tarred with the industry brush, sort out your industry. It is your job, if you don't want the blame that goes with them.@robbery
You obviously do not know what they're saying. Try looking at the arguments they make for for ACTA. One of the reasons ACTA has been proposed is that the US is getting no traction in the WTO, because the developing countries are saying "it's not the most important thing on our agenda".As for your "customer" comment, pretty much tells me why you're worried about going out of business.
Pretty much going back to ignoring you now. Buh-bye