back to article OMG, dad, you're so embarrassing! Are you P2P file sharing again?

Fathers can now add "file sharing" to the list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children - alongside dancing badly in public. P2P file sharing, which peaked over a decade ago, is now the preserve of middle-aged and older internet users. Research from two separate studies (by Kantar and INCOPRO) for UK Music and the …

Might be an uncommon opinion, but I actually pay for the good/services I use...I dunno call me old-fashioned I guess.

35
5
Silver badge

I already own legal copies of 99% of the music I will ever want to listen to, so I already paid for it.

I'm not paying again for a subscription so it can be delivered to me again on my own bandwidth cost.

68
1
Anonymous Coward

re: pay for the good/services

Most freetards would like to pay too. But not the artificially inflated price set by corporate greed.

And once you have tasted the forbidden fruit of a TV show with no adverts (I marvel at people on Sky et al who are *paying* to see adverts .... surely if you pay, you *shouldn't* be seeing adverts ????) then there is no going back.

Oh, and Amazon Prime and Netflix (which I *do* pay for) have got it spot on. No adverts in paid content ....

105
3
Silver badge

Re: re: pay for the good/services

"artificially inflated price"

I don't think you understand how markets work. There is no "natural un-inflated price". The price is whatever the supplier believes they can maximize their profits at.

18
19
Anonymous Coward

Don't you dare give the bourgeoisie a penny more than you need to.

This childishly transparent propaganda article uses ageism, and the suggestion that you don't conform to the social mores of the ruling-class (you're single and sleep with whores) to enforce class hierarchy. To put you in your place as a consumer of corporate culture, and never a creator of folk culture.

If the stereotypical proletariat “starving” artist even exists, then they've already been fully exploited by the bourgeoisie, and there is no ethical choice you can make, whether torrenting, ripping or buying. If anything torrenting is optimal because it enriches the cultural life of your fellow worker at no cost to anyone.

These days however, most artists who create commodities aimed at the proletariat, are themselves bourgeoisie, from old money families, or at least the product of nepotism, since forcing a brand into the public consciousness is ridiculously capital intensive.

30
6

That's what I thought.

I've found streaming a cheaper way to legally listen to music a few times out of interest.

For instance, while being familiar with the singles, I realised I'd never actually listened to the Beatles albums.

I was able to stream them while at work, came across a lot of interesting stuff. Would I have spent >£80 to buy them? No.

Will I listen to them again? Possibly.

It can be great value for money. And some of that money gets back to the artist, unlike streaming or youtube.

(actually if I could trust it to go to the artist rather than the streaming company, I'd pay more for the service.)

2
0
Silver badge

I'm not paying again for a subscription so it can be delivered to me again on my own bandwidth cost.

It's more convenient for me to [losslessly] stream* than it is to walk over to my shelves, find the CD and put it on. It has the added benefit that artists that I like make a bit more money out of it.

*Either from my NAS or the Internet

1
9
Silver badge

"Might be an uncommon opinion, but I actually pay for the good/services I use...I dunno call me old-fashioned I guess."

You're old fashioned.

And so am I. :)

Only yesterday, someone mentioned a band in an email, with a link to one of their numbers on YouTube1. I gave it a watch/listen, then moved on to a couple more of their YouTube videos. I decided I liked them a lot, so I immediately purchased their album.

1. In the interests of completeness: Cardboard Love, by The Hallows

7
1

Re: re: pay for the good/services

"Most freetards would like to pay too. But not the artificially inflated price set by corporate greed."

Interestingly, I changed my model a couple of years ago on my Bandcamp page to be free with the option of paying for it if you want. I now get far more paying downloads than I did before I had the mandatory charge.

28
0
Silver badge
Meh

Re: re: pay for the good/services

surely if you pay, you *shouldn't* be seeing adverts ????

That depends on the provider. It's up to them to decide how to balance the two revenue streams (adverts and subscription) in a way that achieves their goals. They've probably all found that a subscription high enough to offset the complete absence of advertising revenue puts off too many people. Sky is expensive enough as it is - pay to get rid of all the adverts and it would be out of reach of most people. And even those that could afford would probably not consider it worthwhile.

It's also unclear how they could get rid of all the adverts on their platform. Most of the channels are owned by other broadcasters and Ofcom prohibit Sky from interfering with those channels. There would have to be an industry-wide agreement not to show adverts and how you move everyone from an ad-based revenue stream to a shared subscription model I dread to think. It might not even be possible.

3
9
Anonymous Coward

Re: re: pay for the good/services

"The price is whatever the supplier believes they can maximize their profits at."

Brilliant. We can crack on pirating then, because the price they're selling at is maximising their profit they can't possibly do any better.

Im glad its not greed that sets the prices. Or "George Lucasing" the fuck out of the same dead horse for decades.

For the media industry ive got a PSA for you.

You you wouldn't bill me every time I take a book off my shelf.

You wouldn't charge me to watch the same DVD over and over.

You wouldn't fine me for playing aga doo at a childs birthday party.

You wouldn't prevent me downloading a copy of the music / movie I already own.

Copyright abuse is theft and nonesense. Don't do it.

23
6
Anonymous Coward

Old-fashioned...

Funny thing, I'm old fashioned too - and I remember when 'stream ripping' was called 'home taping', which if I'm not mistaken is the analog analogue...

But I guess you never did that as a teenager, either.

27
0
Bronze badge
Happy

Adverts...@AndrueC

If not for adverts, when would you make tea/have a ciggi/loo visits. PP

3
2
Silver badge

Re: re: pay for the good/services

I was agreeing with some of your other points, or were ambivalent to them, however (assuming you were being serious):

Copyright abuse is theft and nonesense. Don't do it

Copyright is not, and never can be, theft. Copyright violation is copyright violation, nothing more, nothing less. This doesn't mean that violating copyright is a good thing, just that it's not theft.

Makes a whole mockery of the UK's self-serving FACT organisation (Federation Against Copyright Theft) - it's hard to take an organsation seriously when even their name is a lie. As for the unskippable adverts and theft lies at the beginning of DVDs... that is exactly why I play a ripped copy and not the bloody original DVD or BluRay disc. When I choose to watch a film, I'd like it to start there and then, not some unspecified 5-10m in the future.

24
5
Devil

Me too, except I actually care who I'm paying..

> Might be an uncommon opinion, but I actually pay for the good/services I use...I dunno call me old-fashioned I guess.

If I thought that any of it was going to the people who actually make the goods/services that *i* use, then I would (and do) pay.

However, I'm not particularly into the mainstream manufactured crap that is where most of big-media invest their funds (apart from their next ocean-going yacht), so I guess that makes me middle-class.

Half the time, if I'm after a particular film / piece of music, it's not available from any paid services - and even if it is available, the content mafia just pocket the money anyway - it's not like the original creators are going to be making more music/films if they are long dead (but copyright is Life+95 years thanks to the Mickey Mouse Act).

So half the time I'm forced to stream anyway. But the other half the time, if the paid services were charging a reasonable rate based on the cost of delivering their service (i.e. maintaining shed loads of hard disks, and a ton of bandwidth) then I would happily pay the requisite 50p per film / 5p per music track, with at least 50% paid to the artists unless I ask to pay them more because I really liked it, then artists would get paid properly and I would buy a hell of a lot more content.

As it happens, I bought a subscription to Magnatune, which has exactly this model. But that definitely makes me middle-class.. <_<

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Personally I find streaming on questionable sites to not be worth the effort provided I can get the content legally. The few times I have engaged in the practice have come only after exhausting all legal avenues of getting the content in question - including such horrendously over-priced options as going to the theater*. Only when I can't find any legal means of watching something, which really doesn't seem to happen any more, do I turn to sites of questionable legality.

*Yes, theaters are overpriced. $10 for a ticket to watch a movie once with a bunch of strangers, inevitably including at least a few who have never learned any form of etiquette, when I'll be able to buy the DVD for $9 in a month or two and watch it all I want in the comfort of my own home? I have to want to see something pretty badly to be willing to do that.

2
0

boxed set

Bought the Beatles boxed set back in the 70's,

but now have and regularly listen to the Beatles discography.

I reckon I've purchased a license to listen to their music,

and back then it was for life, not a single play on one device.

...relax and float downstream...

LSD, the golden age

5
0
Silver badge

"You wouldn't bill me every time I take a book off my shelf"

Wouldn't they fuck. If they could work out a way to do it then you bet your ass they would.

10
0
Pirate

Re: Old-fashioned...

I remember when 'stream ripping' was called 'home taping',

Yes, but as we all know, "Home Taping was Killing Music". That might also explain why so much popular music is produced by soulless zombie bands nowadays.

10
0
Silver badge

Same here

but I actually pay for the good/services I use.

Same here.

The only thing which I am interested is consuming it the way I like it and where I like it.

I have a bleeping hard copy, I paid all the royalties, now I would like to have it on my 10TB NAS so I can watch it anywhere in the house, on the 3TB hard drive in the "remote descendant of a GM2 Betty" I use to travel around Europe so that there is peace in the back seats and on the similarly sized drive array at my summer house/office. I do not see why the f*** I should be prohibited from doing so.

1
0

Re: Old-fashioned...

More like the record companies just want to sell the same formulaic crap that will make them the biggest profit.

Good music exists out there its just not mainstream and easy to find.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: re: pay for the good/services

"The price is whatever the supplier believes they can maximize their profits at."

In a truely competitive market supplier prices will coverge on a cost + small margin model.

In the current market, suppliers manipulate the laws to prevent competition and can therefore charge what they want up to the point where they encounter consumer resistance - think of the piracy side of things as that consumer resistance in action.

This kind of supplier abuse is the exact reason why royal patents were abolished entirely a few hundred years ago and then the system recreated to give a fairer market. The USA's deliberate non-recognition of foreign copyright/patents until recently (and china's effective simliar policy) acted as similar reformation devices but it's clear that since WW2 things have been sewn up tighter and tighter on the supply side. It's time for another set of wide-ranging reforms which don't hand excess power to the creators and middlemen (especially the middlemen, who are generally ripping off both creators and consumers with gay abandon)

4
0
Silver badge

Re: "You wouldn't bill me every time I take a book off my shelf"

They tried (and failed) to shut down public libraries.

They tried (and failed) to make the sale of secondhand books illegal.

They tried (and failed) to make the sale of secondhand records/tapes/CDs/DVDs illegal.

They tried (and failed) to make the same of home video recorders illegal.

They tried (and mostly suceeded) to make the sale of secondhand computer software illegal.

They've suceeded with ebooks and downloads and there have been some attempts using this as leverage to try (again) to get resale of secondhand physical media restricted along with new restrictions on libraries.

9
0
Silver badge

Re: Old-fashioned...

90% of everything published/released is crap. It was true then and it's true now.

Soulless zombie bands have always existed. The difference when looking back is that you're looking through the filter of time that allows you to see the reasonable 10% of what was released and ignore the rest.

The same applies to books. Most of what's published aren't fit to wipe your arse with and thankfully will be forgotten next year let alone next decade.

8
1
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Re: re: pay for the good/services

"Most freetards would like to pay too. But not the artificially inflated price set by corporate greed."

In which case, how do you explain Android's insane piracy rate and the rise of free-to-play while games priced at a dollar or less are left to flounder?

1
0
Silver badge

> It has the added benefit that artists that I like make a bit more money out of it.

How naive. As ever, it's the publishers* operating the toll-gates between artist and audience who will benefit.

* And of course, their PR team, including the articles' author...

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: "You wouldn't bill me every time I take a book off my shelf"

>They've suceeded with ebooks and downloads

Not really. There are (allegedly) still Usenet groups devoted to ebooks. And (if you do buy from DRM-locked sources) there is (allegedly) a high-Calibre bit of software that you can use, with plugins, to remove the DRM and save it in epub form so that one can (allegedly) read it on non-approved devices (and especially, ones that don't feed back every page turn to the mothership).

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: re: pay for the good/services

Pretty certain i said copyright abuse is theft not copyright itself.

Can we rewind his upvotes please?

Enforcing your rights as a copyright holder is cool. Leveraging your rights to rip people off, waste court time and generally troll well meaning people (exercising their right to fair use) is not.

If someone blatantly copies and resells any content I produce on an industrial scale, I will do everything in my power to stop them since I don't profit from it myself. If I did, I'd probably care less.

If someone decides to share with a few friends and family, who cares?

I produce content for people to see not for me to profiteer on.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: re: pay for the good/services

>I don't think you understand how markets work. There is no "natural un-inflated price". The price is whatever the supplier believes they can maximize their profits at.

I don't think you realise how true capitalism works, in a true capitalist society there would be no copyright or patents.

Techdirt puts the points well:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121204/02422821219/fixing-copyright-is-copyright-part-free-market-capitalism.shtml

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: re: pay for the good/services

Just Enough

Years ago I read about how Sony were losing money to chipped PlayStations. They claimed that they had to charge a higher amount to pay for game development, distribution and advertising. Fair enough but then the complained that not only were the pirates selling more games than they were but they were making more money!!!

Obviously the irony was lost on them. Just lower the price and you make more money and put the pirates out of business.

So they maybe charging what they think people will pay but unless they only want to sell a few to rich people then they have not maximized to their market potential. Heck they could charge £1000,000 per game on only sell to Premier League football players.

1
0
Bronze badge

"These days however, most artists who create commodities aimed at the proletariat, are themselves bourgeoisie, from old money families, or at least the product of nepotism, since forcing a brand into the public consciousness is ridiculously capital intensive."

Or in other words it's a joke to say it deprives the artist of money. Since when has a pirated artist every been the artist short of money? It's the ones without the mass market deals who need the money.

1
0
Silver badge

"It's more convenient for me to [losslessly] stream* than it is to walk over to my shelves, find the CD and put it on. It has the added benefit that artists that I like make a bit more money out of it."

You may think that. In some cases it may even be true. In others, you need to know who "owns" the songs before you know who gets the money. Since the Beatles have been mentioned, Sony get the money for those albums/tracks.

2
0

Re: Adverts...@AndrueC

It's called the pause button.

0
0
aks

the money goes to the copyright holder.

occasionally, that's the artist.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Same here

@Voland's right hand - My brain misread that as a G4M2 Betty - if you actually ARE pootling around Europe in an antique propellor plane , may i just say how utterly envious of you I am? :-}

0
0
Silver badge

Who's of thunk it

Middle aged blokes who do P2P file sharing also seek paid "escorts". Since I only hit one of the three criteria I can't judge whether that is reasonable or not, but I'm sceptical. Still, who am I to doubt marketing?

5
0
Silver badge
Holmes

Re: Who's of thunk it

Hmm, people too tight to splurge a couple of quid for a video or music track? I can't see them splurging (money) on an escort...

7
2
Silver badge

Re: Who's of thunk it

So, when you become middle aged and start P2P, they'll have your profile right then? :-)

1
0
Silver badge
Windows

Re: Who's of thunk it

Middle aged blokes who do P2P file sharing also seek paid "escorts". Since I only hit one of the three criteria I can't judge whether that is reasonable or not, but I'm sceptical. Still, who am I to doubt marketing?

You damn millenials, can't you just listen to some free music instead of pushing up the price of escorts for us old farts?

36
0
Anonymous Coward

"I can't see them splurging (money) on an escort..."

They will pay for what they can't copy or get for free. So they'll have to pay for sex, no other way to get it...

3
2
Silver badge

Re: Who's of thunk it

Nothing special about that. I often pay escorts to download music and movies. It's a win all around.

13
0

Re: Who's of thunk it

As a middle aged bloke, I use p2p to occasionally download content (mostly 'educational' movies) because content prices are, for me anyway, too high. Male escorts, however, haven't gone up in price nearly as much as media content.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Who's of thunk it

Middle aged blokes who do P2P file sharing also seek paid "escorts".

Well their wives stopped putting out years ago, so what do you expect?

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Who's of thunk it

I'd add that elders (70+) are just as likely to p2p. Trying explain to them how to capture the stream of their favorite songs (off social network of their choice) proved to be frustrating though (and resembled doing someone's homework).

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Who's of thunk it

Nothing special about that. I often pay escorts to download music and movies. It's a win all around.

I used to have an escort, but I gave it the boot.

Now it's an Orion.

0
0
Silver badge

...list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children - alongside dancing badly in public.

and so we should.

Having put up with years of tantrums, vomiting, whining, sulks, unreasonable demands, money leeching, it is a fathers right to get his own back.

70
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: ...list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children

plus a carefully selected bunch of photos showing those bold young people - as they were a few years earlier (nappies, etc.) Does wonders to counterbalance the "f... off dad!" argument! ;)

9
0
Silver badge

I learned dad dancing precisely because of this.

9
0
Bronze badge
Pint

Re: ...list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children ..

@ Lost all faith....Amen brother. Have an upvote and one of these.

1
0
Bronze badge
Trollface

Re: ...list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children

Avenge yourself - live long enough to be a burden to your children.

0
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017