6 ms·
Reasons why this is a waste of resources: 1) Detecting piracy is resource intensive. You have to design algorithms to detect infringement and you have to impl
by beloch 15y ago
Reasons why this is a waste of resources:
1) Detecting piracy is resource intensive. You have to design algorithms to detect infringement and you have to implement them in a way that can keep up with a respectable portion of your backbone bandwidth without significantly degrading performance for consumers.
2) File sharing protocols can adapt rapidly and will most likely make more and more extensive use of encryption. Distinguishing legal file sharing from illegal file sharing will only get more and more difficult. Even if there remain ways to detect infringement, this arms race with file-sharers will feed back into 1 in a big way.
3) As Neil Young famously put it, "Piracy is the new radio". Those who adapt to the "new radio" first will reap the rewards. Those who spend massive amounts of cash fighting the inevitable progress of technology will just fall behind.
What should these dinosaurs do if they want to stay competitive? Stop treating users of the "new radio" like criminals and win them over by providing a superior experience to what the pirates can deliver. e.g. Stop loading DVD's and bluray's up with annoying advertisements, anti-piracy messages, and warnings. Online stores shouldn't sell 720p videos or lossy music files when pirates are giving away 1080p videos and lossless audio for free. Above all, minimize the payment barrier. Make it cheap enough to feel like value is high and make it at least as easy and fast as pirating. In short, stop spending money to treat your customers like criminals and, instead, spend it to ensure that legal purchases are the path of least resistance to the highest quality experience.
- quasisimple 15y agoWHERE WERE YOU WHEN THEY PASSED THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT?!?!
- gurkendoktor 15y ago> 1) Detecting piracy is resource intensive People who torrent 24/7 just because they can are also resource intensive. I think there might be a real incentive to kick Joe Leecher out of one's customer base and keep people who only check their email.
- gcb 15y agobut no one would pay $120/mo for 328MBPS DSL⁕ only for checking email. So there's still incentive to make P2P seems a possibility. ⁕ only 0.0001% guaranteed
- ctide 15y agoExactly this. I pay Comcast $200 / mo for 105mbit. In part because it's retardedly fast (I do get the advertised speed generally,) and in part because I don't ever want to think about bandwidth limits or any of the other measures they enforce on people who aren't shoveling over forkloads of cash. If either of those things change, I immediately downgrade.
- thereallurch 15y agoOuch, Charter only charges $82.99 a month (with modem rental) for 100Mbps. Around the same time they introduced 100Mbps service, they introduced bandwidth caps. (500 gb/month for 100mbit service). Bandwidth caps @charter are a 3 strike policy. I can get charter business @~$200 a month which is 100mbit service (no download cap, guaranteed uptime). Are you on some sort of comcast business plan?
- ctide 15y agoNo, it's their highest bandwidth residential plan. Technically, I still have bandwidth caps (http://imageshar.es/4f675654998b758611000b60 http://imageshar.es/4f675654998b758611000b60) but they don't enforce them.
- ttt_ 15y agoI don't know how it's been going in the US, but I'm pretty used to seeing ISPs advertise their high-bandwith services towards downloading music, video and online gaming. They want to get the heavy users to pay a lot and then they punish them for being heavy users (not entering the whole piracy debate, just that they consume loads of bandwith - that they pay for).
- 15y ago
- gcb 15y ago> Reasons why this is a waste of resources to who? seems the best deal ever regarding cost/benefit for the RIAA members.
- vibrunazo 15y agoI'd love to see that pitch to a VC. VC: So what do you need this money for? Are you gonna improve your UX and distribution? Startup: Oh no, we're just gonna use the UX and distribution our users hate. We need the money to lobby congress to pass laws that punish users who use competing products that do have better UX and distribution. If you ever convince a VC with a pitch like that. Then you can say it's the best deal ever regarding cost/benefit for the RIAA. ;)
- krosaen 15y agoAgreed on #3 particularly - as soon as spotify and rdio provided a better experience than pirating music, lot's of people were willing to pay.
- joelhooks 15y agoFor music, I love what BandCamp is doing along these lines. High quality, low price, easy access.