my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » 70 million Americans are now federal criminals (Page 5)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

Author Topic: 70 million Americans are now federal criminals Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-23-2003 07:34 AM                     To put payola in simple terms, it is illegal out of an anti-trust issue. Big media conglomerates can stamp out indie labels or independent artists by paying a radio station to use up their free air time playing their stuff. It is flatly illegal for a record company to directly pay a radio station or its parent company to get songs played. Those independent consultants are the loophole. They are neither employed by the radio station or the record studio. They're just middlemen. They pretend to be some kind of advisor to the radio station on what's hot and make their recommendations on what to play and give the radio stations bonuses for playing their recommendations. Of course, all of their recommendations are coming from the record companies, who provide them with all the bonus money. Basically, payola is still happening big as ever. You just have a middleman involved to make it "legal."  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 01-23-2003 10:13 AM                    From what I've read it is not illegal if it is disclosed as a paid broadcast.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 01-23-2003 11:26 AM                        That's what I was trying to get at with my poorly worded previous post. Could a record company like Virgin buy airtime from the broadcaster and call it "The Virgin Hour" or whatever and play nothing but Virgin artists, as long as it's identified as paid promotional time?  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 01-23-2003 11:30 AM                    I don't see why not....excepting of course that there are no virgins in the entertainment business.  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 01-23-2003 01:28 PM                     As a former radio broadcaster I can tell you that anyone (including a record company) can buy air time, identify the sponsor, and broadcast anything the station and FCC will allow.  |  IP: Logged Adam Fraser Master Film Handler Posts: 499 From: Houghton Lake, MI, USA Registered: Dec 2001 posted 01-23-2003 02:02 PM                        A local (Saginaw) radio station does just that, they run a show called "Hard Drive" and at the end there is a disclaimer that says something to the effect of "this broadcast was paid for by (inster name here) record company and has sole discression over choice of music" or something like that. They only play songs that are distributed by a few record labels.  |  IP: Logged Charles Everett Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: New Jersey Registered: May 2001 posted 01-23-2003 04:20 PM                     Mike B: RIAA stands for Recording Industry Association of America. Once upon a time it was the group that handed out Gold Record awards for sales of one million 45s. Now it's seen as the lobbying outfit for the "Greedy Record Industry". Where is the RIAA based? Washington DC. No offices in NYC, LA or Nashville -- the centers of the US music industry! FWIW the director of the RIAA announced yesterday that she is stepping down.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-23-2003 06:11 PM                     "Paid Programming" of course is legal. But maybe I'm not making my point clear on payola. Most music stations have their regular song format radio airplay running much of the day and have normal commerical breaks with a wide variety of advertisers. Those programming blocks are not "paid programming" by way of the definitions described in the posts above. In normal song rotation, payola is illegal. There is no radio station on the planet that will say something on-air in normal programming rotation like "Jive records paid a consultant who paid us to play the N Sync song you are about to hear." Even though there are no disclaimers, the shit is still happening on a very widespread basis. It is blocking out new creative music from being played on the radio. The conglomeration of many record companies into a mere but very large few is helping block out anything new from happening. Payola, ClearChannel style radio monopolization and the consolidation of record companies are the main factors on why people are not buying as much music anymore. Oh, I almost forgot about the price fixing from large retail stores to attempt enforcing a $20 price for a CD. That's also a factor. The product on the shelves, in general, is very very stale --all by corporate design. The music sounds like the same old junk just retred over again. I don't want to buy it. I don't want to listen to it. And the RIAA doesn't have to worry about me downloading it. When music becomes interesting again, maybe I'll get back to the record store and buy some CDs.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-23-2003 06:52 PM                        Charles: I know that, for Pete's sake. I was being sarcastic. What I was trying to get across is: The RIAA does not "make music (or whatever passes for music these days)." The artists do that. Not the RIAA.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 01-26-2003 08:52 PM                    Going back to the file swapping issue it seems like the RIAA is now employing goons to flood the file sharing networks with dummy versions of popular tracks to thwart sharing as one would have to download many times to get one actual track. The fakes have a small bit of music and then go silent for the balance.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-27-2003 01:11 AM                     I could have sworn there was a new buzzword or nickname for that new corrupted file practice being used by the industry. But overall, I think it is akin to using a squirt gun on a factory fire. First, most broadband users aren't very picky about the MP3 files they download. They seem just as happy with small 128kb/s files as anything else. And those can be downloaded pretty darned fast. So if they get one of those corrupted files, they'll just try again from a different user. Not very many people go after high bitrate MP3 files (such as one running at 320kb/s). Even fewer will bother trying to download a full LPCM WAV file. The more saavy users can compare file sizes, info and other cross-referencing information. Deductive reasoning can then easily eliminate those corrupted rogue files from the working ones. And then one can always preview a song while it is downloading and then cut off the download when it is found to be corrupted. Overall, most people on KaZaa are downloading MP3 music with FM radio quality at best. I'm not sure I understand why the RIAA would be up in arms about that. I can get better results taping music off the music only channels of my Dish500 dish out the MiniDisc jack on my Yamaha receiver! To be perfectly honest, the people getting hurt the most by services like KaZaa are computer software companies like Adobe, not the music industry. If the music industry really wants to put a big dent in the music file swapping thing, they should make strong moves to get past the standard Red Book CD format and start pushing the hell out of SACD and DVD-A. CD burners can't dub that. The copy protection schemes with such discs stand up a lot better against DVD-R drives as well. The most important thing is the music industry has to put more value in their discs or at least drop CD prices. Right now, the only thing the RIAA is doing is calling the music industry customer base a bunch a criminals. That's real great bozo marketing! Even if their lawsuits, privacy invasions and computer hackery works at all, the RIAA is doing great marketing damage to the music industry. Aren't those suits the slightest bit concerned about how they come off in public?  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 01-27-2003 10:58 AM                    Here is an interesting question for you: Why is Microsoft cooperating in putting various protection schemes into their OS? Don't they make more money from individual users than from a few big corporations? So why go along with ideas that only serve to piss off the majority of their customers? As I see it nothing is totally bulletproof. Attempts to encrypt and then somehow protect the raw audio data being delivered to the sound card will always be subject to hacking. And if they build decryption into the sound card there will always be, as a last resort, back to back copying using analog connections. Given that most people are entirely satisfied with the 128 rate mp3 format, the minor degradation will not be an issue. The issue will be solved when they deliver more value for the money. SACD and DVD/A is one way. Reasonable pricing is another.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 01-31-2003 06:55 AM                        The front page of today's Hollywood Reporter has an article about Clear Channel Communications Chairman Lowry Mays testifying to the Senate Commerce Committee about "pay for play": http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/threast/pdfs/thre0131.pdf  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 04-25-2003 05:23 PM                        Figured I'd resurrect this thread with news of the latest shot in the RIAA/MPAA vs. peer-to-peer wars: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1212&e=1&u=/nm/20030425/tc_nm/tech_music_dc&sid=95573503  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 04-25-2003 05:50 PM                        I kind of like the RIAA's latest lawsuit for 97 billion 800 million dollars. http://www.ews.uiuc.edu/~zrosen/ Record Industry Sues 4 Students Running File-Sharing Networks And you thought you had difficulty paying off your student loans.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.