3 ms·
the decision to invest the $100M is a business decision. Wanting the laws changed to favour your business decision is understandable I guess but if you extend t
by junklight 15y ago
the decision to invest the $100M is a business decision. Wanting the laws changed to favour your business decision is understandable I guess but if you extend that line of thinking - why aren't they lobbying for, oh I don't know, people have to go to the cinema once a month? or that there should be a cinema tax. Everyone has to pay $10 a month to the film industry.
see how far you get with any investor if your plan involves changing the law to create more favourable conditions for your profit.
these business models will all eventually die and be replaced by younger people who grew up in this copy and copy alike world and will find new ways of making money but there might be a hell of a lot of collateral damage to the law as they go down.
- chopsueyar 15y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damage
- sesqu 15y agoEveryone has to pay $10 a month to the film industry. We already have the IP tax. In my country, it's essentially a value added tax on all digital mass media, regardless of use. The money from that is lumped in with the money from concerts and from playing radio in public, and goes to an entertainment organization that then distributes it to its members and partners as it sees fit.