8 ms·
I don't agree. The size of the set is of paramount importance to that point. They can always bring the mean down by just adding more recordings to the set, to f
by nottrobin 3y ago
I don't agree. The size of the set is of paramount importance to that point. They can always bring the mean down by just adding more recordings to the set, to further obscure how popular the most popular recordings are. In a set of 10 billion, of course people aren't listening to most of them.
Quite clearly what the plaintiffs are afraid of is that there are a few very popular works in there that they could be making real money from. There's no way to know this from the mean alone.
- dmbche 3y agoThey got 400 000 records in the collection, I don't think they're being dishonest here
- 6510 3y agoThat is far from the truth. The companies have very successful legal departments. They go after the next lowest hanging fruit. They are just working, it's their job description to do this. This is why they will never stop, it never gets too absurd or overly unreasonable. edit: Deleted fake example
- mlyle 3y agoEven if all the traffic were from 100 pieces, that's a few thousand downloads per month. Let's talk about those specific pieces, then, instead of trying to obliterate an archive.