begin oe_protect.scr
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Over at Groklaw, an interesting point is being made by PJ.
>
> First she links to the following:
>
> http://www.ottawasun.com/News/OttawaAndRegion/2006/08/16/1758016-sun.html
>
> (Need to pay to read article)
>
> Then, she links to NYT:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/g8964
>
> Article title is "At Forbes.com, Lots of Glitter but Maybe Not So Many
> Visitors" and, once again, it need subscription (beyond cookie) merely to be
> read.
>
> Then, she links to the following, showing why the music/copyright industry
> struggles.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjA5faZF1A8
>
> Watch the numbers.
>
> What about Wikipedia < http://tinyurl.com/px99w >? And the 100+ million
> blogs? YouTube/Yahoo Videos/Google Video, among others? The point being: be
> freely-available, or be gone. It's the Open-Sourcing of content. Much like
> software...
I think the days of trying to force a shortage of these types of goods
in order to push up value are more or less over. It does beg some very
interesting questions, though, like what is the future of cinema, film,
film-studios, and so on?
Probably I'm just getting old, but the majority of "blockbusters" seem
to me to be puerile beyond any reasonable requirement, and in the main,
so formulaic that I can practically predict the next line and/or scene.
Similarly, what about print media? Can magazines survive? /How/ will
they survive? Will people (public) be prepared to pay for a paper copy
of something that they can see online?
I know that most of the newspapers went through this discussion some
time ago internally, and most decided to have an online presence.
Some, after some period, started making a login requirement, and a few
demanded payment. Few, if any, put all their content online.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
If you notice that a person is deceiving you, they must not be
deceiving you very well.
|
|
