Rande - "Opinionated as ever. . . " - lol, I love it.
Actually, besides the well reasoned group who post on this thread, and the amazing market calls, I do love the various opinions expressed by you and others from time to time on a variety of issues. I enjoy folks who make you think, and provide various points of view.
As far as the Music Industry vs. napster et al - again, I don't necessarily disagree with you, and a couple of the points I was trying to make are really seperate from the moral / ethical / legal issues, but here is just another point of view to consider, plus a restatement in a different way of my main points:
1. I agree with you completely that "just because you can, does not mean you should". All of the examples you state make perfect sense, and we could all state more. No argument from me here.
2. However, let me take an argument to the extreme (again - just for a different point of view because I actually agree with you on your main point). Many moons ago, we had reel to reel decks, then 8 track players / recorders, then moved up to casette decks, then VCRs, and now the next big thing in recording devices is CD-RW. With the introduction of each of these technologies, there was always a huge outcry of concern over artists, the record companies, etc being hurt because they would facilitate the unauthorized copying of recorded material. And yet, the industry survived and thrived. Folks everywhere recorded casette tapes from their favorite radio station of certain songs, from LPs from friends, from CDs from friends when they came out, etc. On any college campus, there was a whole bunch of unauthorized copies being made of music in an exchange between friends I don't think anyone would argue that this has always occurred. Was it right, ethical , moral, legal - well I am not debating that. Just saying it occurred - and over time certainly became a generally accepted practice. there were no prosecutions of these individuals, no music vicce squads hunting them down, etc. It became accepted, rightly or wrongly.
Now we fast forward to 1999, with the power of the internet, and the wide spread acceptance of CD-RWs, MP3s, etc. And new technologies are developed, including a program called napster. Interestingly, it was developed by some college kid, to help him and his friends share music, and copy them to their hard drives, or maybe to CDRs. Just like the old days. Kids sharing music among friends, with the only difference being the recording media is now computer hard drives and CDRs instead of cassettes.
fast forward to late 1999, early 2000. Things are happening in internet time now. Napster spreads among the college crowd. Now friends can share music with friends across the country. Folks are making new friends, and sharing music among one another - just like the old days - except now the sneaker network and cassette decks are replaced by high speed T-3 lines on college campuses, and computer disks. And instead of having maybe a dozen friends they like to share with, now they have thousands. But just like the old days - sharing music among friends. What has changed ??? it became an accepted practice in the past, even if it didn't meet the letter of the law, or may not have been moral or ethical. But it occurred. Today's youth just stepped it up with the times, and made things more efficient - just like technology has made lots of other things more efficient. What has changed??? yes, its a bit absurd - but . . .
3. Now, my main points were that while stopping MP3.com was easy, and stopping Napster was harder, stopping the next generation will become almost imposible. Sure, someone may find a way to stop Gnutella, but there are a whole host of other things in the works. Technology marches on. When you have folks who have been sharing music among one another since the first recording device was invented, without any real consequence, well its inevitable that those who want to continue to share will always find a better way to do so. As the one article I posted put it, the RIAA may have won a victory over Napster, they may have lost the war.
4. My other main point thusly was that even with the vistory over Napster, I don't think it makes the e-music type stocks attrractive buys right now. As long as other alternatives exist, people will move to use them. gnutella, frenet, Opennap, and something in the mind of some 17 year old kid somewhere. I don't think e-music stocks become attractive until the recording industry gets its act together, agreeing on a standard, and modern method of distribution, etc. From what I see, and its just from what I read, the industry is more intent on each other doing its own thing, and fighting the Napsters of the world, the coming up with a better way and moving into the 21st century.
also pretty opinionated, and offering just another point of view
Mav |
