toggle

AAPL Stock: 546.08 ( -7.1 )

MacNN News

Record, tech industries struggle to earn profit

updated 11:55 pm EST, Fri November 14, 2003

\'Net music sales struggle

As paid music sites from Rhapsody to Napster reinvent themselves in time for the holidays, , reports CBS MarketWatch. "The music industry's failure at selling its products online and the continued availability of songs through illegal file-sharing have led analysts to cut projected sales of online music in 2006 to $1.4 billion -- a quarter of their estimate two years ago." Even the biggest success in online-music sales -- Apple's ITunes -- is "basically a loss leader meant to drive sales of IPod portable music players," the article says, to paraphrase Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs.

by MacNN Staff

(56)

TAGS :

industry

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 01:01am | report spam | close Reply |
ummm

I don't think the author of the article gets the point. iTMS is a loss-leader for Apple because Apple only gets $.10 on the dollar for stuff sold there. That does not mean it loses money for the music industry as well.

Considering that the music industry pays essentially nothing for the songs to be put on iTMS, I would say they are making a fairly nice profit on it.

Just more junk journalism

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 02:22am | report spam | close Reply |
Also...

There's never going to be money made since RIAA's fees are so high.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 04:39am | report spam | close Reply |
re: Also...

"There's never going to be money made since RIAA's fees are so high."

Huh?? Are you saying that the record companies are never going to make money because the recording industry fees are too high? Or are you saying that Apple will never make money because of the fees?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 07:46am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: ummm

You said everything I was thinking. I hate distorted story. In the first part of the sentence they talk about record company's profit, on the second part of the sentence they switch to Apple's profit just to support their proposition.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 08:01am | report spam | close Reply |
iTunes breaks even...

...ipods break records (guiness, not music).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 08:42am | report spam | close Reply |
I thought it was good ...

Especially when you do the math like they did and see how many songs have to be downloaded before you get to $1 billion per year. I doubt very much that this big rush of everybody and their dog to have a paid music download service is going to last. I predict that in a year there will only be 2 or 3 music download services left. Apple will be left for sure, since this effort supports their sale of iPods (which are making a big wad of cash for Apple). Microsoft is starting a service, and they are likely to stay in, as they have very deep pockets, and they could make money if their technology shows up in other people's players (including Windows Media Files ....). I doubt WallMart's service will be successful. They are the experts in loss leaders, but how they will link online downloads to other purchases which generate profit, I have no idea. Roxio and the others are going to lose a bunch of money and then get out. That's my 2 cents!
Cheers!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 08:44am | report spam | close Reply |
Who will dominate evt?

So Apple pioneers. The music industry takes over because that's where most of your .99$ go and where the rights are. 'Till that point I hope Apple will have sold enough iPods and AAC format music so that we will keep apple support (and format) in the future. Or could it be that AAC really becomes the universal format for music download?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 10:00am | report spam | close Reply |
I'm so sick of the

Asinine manner in which the "cost of piracy" is calculated. If every one of the downloaded P2P songs equated to one song not sold by the record companies then it might make sense. However, there is no way of knowing whether or not "pirates" would have or will purchase legit music on a one to one basis (not likely). It's a fallacy of association and amateurish.
There is no doubt an association between P2P and failing record sales but the RIAA's "model" is doubtful. More FUD.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 10:17am | report spam | close Reply |
31%

I read somewhere that the music industry's profit has dropped 31% since it first started wining about napster all those years ago. I don't think piracy has done them in, I think that they are just trying to cover up cause they haven't produced much good music since then. LOL, just a personal opinion.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 10:59am | report spam | close Reply |
Hey now

What exactly is ITunes, or IPod? Do you mean to say iTunes and iPod. Let's get it straight. Capitalizing the "i" makes you look like a Wintel troll.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 11:53am | report spam | close Reply |
RE: I'm so sick of the..

I agree with you. Acording to the same "experts" If I have a stomach ache and don't go to work today the cost to society is $20,000 because of the deal I would have made if I had been there. But instead I don't and hundreds lose their job because of the resulting industry cutbacks. I should be arrested.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 11:55am | report spam | close Reply |
re: 31%

>I read somewhere that the music industry's profit has dropped
> 31% since it first started wining about napster all those years
> ago. I don't think piracy has done them in, I think that they are
>just trying to cover up cause they haven't produced much good
> music since then. LOL, just a personal opinion.
When it started whining about napster the .com buzz was on. Wall stree was inflated over the .com mess. Now we have an economic downturn. All areas of the economy, including music and computer sales have been hit hard. The RIAA would rather blame the natural downturn in the economy on file sharing networks.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 12:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
It's a fact...

... the world will eventually be rid of CD's (along with the old 8-Tracks, LP's). Digital over the web is basically the given that's going to be used for all distribution ... whether they figure some sort of industry standard DRM scheme, etc.

Apple being first in is a GOOD thing, if selling iPod's helps them going, GREAT, but think eventually a 'helluva' lot more will be sold this way and then it'll get into other digital assets such as maybe first music videos???, then sometime in the future movies.

Possibly inevitably someone else may benefit from Apple's instigation of 'legal' music selling, but it's here to stay and they'll learn how they have to work it to make money, after all money makes the world go round!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 12:39pm | report spam | close Reply |
I agree

Piracy stats are intangible!

I have Photoshop on my machine, but Adobe didn't LOSE because I have it, cuz I could never afford it. (Family comes first). In fact, some may argue that having piracy of their product and therefore more mindshare actually helps a product to a 'small' degree.

The same could be said regarding music, ask any record company, if you can get airplay on radio, you can guarantee some sales, if everyone is Kaza'ing a certain tune, a lot of people are listening/requesting on radio stations, etc. which will benefit the record company (or do they call them music companies now?)... again to some intangible degree.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 01:18pm | report spam | close Reply |
I agree

I have a BMW near my driveway, but BMW didn't LOSE, cause I could never afford it, the real owner won't LOSE either, I didn't strip his car! I'm just sharing it for a while. I'll return it to him in 3 days. In fact! Some may argue that this type of thief helps to a small degree cause more people see a BMW being driven around.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 01:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: I agree

Your PhotoShop remark and mentality is completely backwards. Adobe DID lose money. You're using it and didn't pay for it -- that's where their money comes from -- from people using the software and paying for it. This isn't like making garden gnomes and selling them, where there's a limited number of items produced and if some people get them for nothing then the maker loses money -- this is software, and the line gets fuzzy, but the point is that you stole property and you're using it illegally. There's no excuse you can come up with to justify that, and the "I don't have enough money" B.S. is just an empty excuse. You don't NEED PhotoShop, you just wanted it, and you wanted it for free... that's a lame mentality.

If you can't afford PhotoShop, why use it? Are you making money from the use of PhotoShop, as in graphic design? What "can't live without" features of PhotoShop are there that prevent you from using less expensive alternatives?

People sit here and argue that since there's no tangible item to steal that the seller of that item really doesn't lose money when someone "copies" something in violation of the license. That's a lazy-a** excuse to justify stealing. You'd be singing a different tune if you were on the other side of the fence... I don't think you'd be happy with writing a program, selling it and finding out that a lot of people are using it without paying for it.

No doubt the RIAA needs to change methods to "get with the times" and embrace digital media, because that's obviously where the music industry is headed. I do think they've been heavy-handed in their methods and are responsible for keeping the price of music so high, but they're working WITH Apple and other companies to change, and that's a good thing... it ain't gonna happen overnight, people.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 02:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
I agree

If you are using photoshop to "Mess around" your using a jack hammer to carve wood. Coping photoshop is stealing. I don't care what justification you come up with. It's wrong and can land you in jail. Use a cheaper program like Graphic converter. I'm a web writer and I process all my graphics with graphic converter. It has 90% of photoshop's abilities and it's only $35. I PAID for it. I use it for business and it suits my needs. I do not need photo shop for my work and neither do you. If your using it to make money pay for it, or delete it and get a new job. Because if you cannot afford the overhead for the business then you need to find another line of work.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 02:41pm | report spam | close Reply |
photoshop

I love the brain dead comparisons between stealing Photoshop and stealing music. Stealing is stealing

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 03:39pm | report spam | close Reply |
stealing is stealing but?

I completely agree with the stealing is stealing bit but what you guys don't understand is that if he took your suggestion and used a simpler program like graphics converter then guess what, Adobe still hasn't made any money of him just as if he stole photoshop in the first place.

They never made money because he would not buy it. They never lost money for his theft because he did not steal anything tangible they produced such as a CD or manual or even a box.

It is a sticky area and yes he is using the knowledge of the programmers because they made the program but they have neither gained no lost money from this kind of theft. They only have the knowledge of his theft and the knowledge of the loss of money they would never have had in the first place which makes them mad. He can make a million copies and not one cent was stolen FROM Adobe. But it also means they didn't make one cent which is where the theft comes in.

Getting back to music, personally I would not own anywhere near as many songs as I have if it weren't for mp3 trading. I would not pay for any of the songs I now have since I hate buying a CD for just one song that I like. Now I can buy just the songs I like so maybe things will change for me?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 03:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
stealing is

stealing, no matter how you look at it (yeah, i've heard the bloody arguments that it's not "theft" it's copywright infringment). these people are looting, period. and i don't buy the overpriced c*** either. every week i put $20 in the car for gas, next week i'll do it again. every week i buy a 12 pack of coke for $4. every day i spend $8+ for lunch and $2-3 if i bring it from home. every month i pay again for electricity and heating/air conditioning. the list goes on and on. i buy a cd for $15 and that's it. i'll never buy it again and can enjoy it over and over and over.
i want to hear some ray charles or clash tunes while stuck in traffic i pull out the cd's (soon to use my ipod if santa is nice). i don't have to stop off and buy it again and again. so these people are nothing but looters. the window is broken, the cops ain't around and they're using any excuse they can find to justify it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 03:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
I have it on vinyl and/or

Am I stealing if I paid for a song many years ago on an LP and now downloaded an mp3 version? The artist already got the royalty many years ago and so did the 'record' company.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 04:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
fubar

I've actually stopped filesharing. I buy off the iTMS. I'm a musician so it doesn't make sense to cut my own and my friends throats. With that said, going into a Strawberries and seeing a CD for $20 on a rack next to a DVD movie for $15 tells me the industry is suffering from severe hubris.

So little of the profits ever filter down to the creators that I don't feel that sorry for them. If I had a nickel for every recording engineer who felt THEY were the true artists, and musicians just a disagreeable fact of life. Oh please.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 04:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: I have it on vinyl

No, you're not stealing. You paid the license years ago when you got it on record, all you did is change media.

The ugly part of this whole "stealing music" fiasco is that the record companies want you to pay for the music again because the media has changed. Laggards, they're entering the business late and are angry you got the MP3 - regardless of whether you already owned the music or not - from the web for free instead of through their own downloading service for a fee or by paying them to do it for you from your record.

It's basically a big assault on consumers by large corporations.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 05:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
records/tapes

there are some fairly inexpensive hardware out there to convert your tapes/cd's to mp3's. griffin technology i believe has a few.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 05:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
Photoshop vs iTunes

If you bought a scanner / digital camera, then you most likely got PhotoDeluxe or something like it with the package. I'm good that this stuff, and the complimentary versions of PhotoDeluxe and now Photoshop 5LE worked well enough so that I've still never bothered to buy Photoshop Elements - maybe when I go from a 500 G3 to an 800 G4 I'll be able to stand it - but it's overkill. So far, Adobe hasn't lost a dime.

On the other hand, I'll rip mylegally bought CDs to get my old music on my computer, use iTMS for new music, and not have to worry.

As for the DVD/CD price comparison, it's not all hubris - remember, they studio paid the mortgage on that movie once in the theatrical release, once more on pay channels/pay-per-view, once on rentals, and once again on retail purchases. Point being that one movie generates four revenue streams, one giant one and three more that will at least double it, so they can sell a copy for $15. Remember when VHS first started on rentals and sell-thru, most sell-thru videos went for upwards of $80. Once the rental stream matured, they could afford to offer "buy-it-now" pricing.

This will turn around to bite them though, imagine the typical blockbuster rental store - they have a thousand vhs library tapes that they paid big bucks for over the past 20 years, but amortized thru the rentals since. They are only getting DVD on new releases in the past 10 years. Five years from now, no one will be renting those VHS and to satisfy those who want to rent library movies they'll have to re-purchase their library on new DVD.

That's a big outlay. Huizenga had Waste Management money to burn in order to get Blockbuster to where it was - Viacom did the math for all those tapes in all those stores - and was at one time thinking of shopping Blockbuster around precisely for this reason.

The music industry has no such worry - it's all sell-thru, and as far as the RIAA is concerned, they'll find a way to get their money no matter who/how. It's the music stores that better find a way to get a piece of this fast or risk losing the retail music third of their store... Which is prolly why Wal-mart is jumping early. Its a plan worth watching.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 05:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Music & PhotoSho

As one poster said, no, Adobe is not losing money from someone pirating their program and using it... but they're not MAKING money, which is the point of selling software in the first place. If everyone used pirated versions of PhotoShop, Adobe wouldn't have lost a dime, nor would they have made one either, which enables them to release newer and better versions of PhotoShop (oh, boy, I can already hear the debate about how much CS sucks more than 7... let her rip, trolls!).

Stealing. License infringement. Looting. Whatever. It's not right, it's not legal, and if the situations were reversed, you would not want someone taking your program and using it without paying for it. That makes you hypocrites on top of thieves. You can't afford it, yet it's SUCH a cool program and SO damn easy to get your hands on a pirated copy that the coolness of the program offsets the guilt you have about stealing in the first place, if you have any guilt at all!

Keep pirating. Just don't come back with a moronic smile on your face saying, "I just applied the latest Office X update, and now my serial doesn't work -- what gives?" or complain about the Orwellian style "activation" processes that these companies are implementing. You're the reason they do that and you're making it suck for the rest of us.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 05:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
Rants about stealing

You guys can chant "stealing is stealing" all you want, but you didn't refute the point that was made: If you were never going to buy Photoshop in the first place, Adobe didn't lose any money from your theft. You didn't steal something tangible where resources were transferred from Adobe to you--you used information that Adobe didn't give you permission to use.

Whether or not the theft is wrong doesn't really have anything to do with the point made. In fact, it would be easier to argue that Adobe makes money on small time piracy.

* Guy downloads Photoshop
* Guy plays with Photoshop
* Guy learns Photoshop
* Employer looks for anyone with Photoshop skills.
* Guy gets job with his Photoshop skills.
* Adobe raises price of Photoshop to $1000.
* Employer buys another seat of Photoshop
* Adobe gets $1000

Now substitute the first line with "Guy can't afford Photoshop, downloads GIMP instead" and see the effect on that chain of events.

Piracy helps the big developers become de facto standards and maintain their monopolies on their markets. The real losers in software piracy are the small app developers. You could do your work with a $10 app, but when you can get the $1000 app for free...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 06:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple + Music =

Wonderful combo . . .

I think that Apple for sure wants to innovate all the time. Just like music artists.

It's the middle-ground that's shaky, and I really agree with iTMS being a positive step for artists. I think a lot of common music shoppers find it easier anyways to buy with iTunes . . . and, well, its definitely good kharma . . . most people want to do the right thing.

Actually, I could have figured out ways to get free music, I'm sure. But I didn't . . . I think that it must be surprisingly wonderful for RIAA, musicians, and customers all around at how nice this system works. The simplicity for purchasing must spell more money to the music industry, but MOST importantly, I'm getting to enjoy more music again as a customer!

Thanks Apple, for getting me in touch with music again -- I'm now hearing old music I forgot about in my CD collection, and love previewing (and buying a little) and learning about artists and songs I've never heard of! (yes, I have an iPod, and so should everyone else)!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 06:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
What are you listeningto?

Hi all,

STOP; turn on any iTunes song, and come back . . . . . . .

See if this catches on: I propose that all of our (now averaging twice-weekly / twice-daily) posts to iTunes / iPod related posts we include the artist, genre, or composer we're playing in iTunes.

Let people see what we're hearing . . . a tradition of music enjoyment . . . share your tune "in the moment" . . . ie at the end of a message, like this:

Song: Vieux Diop (Via Jo) "Kumba"
Album: "World Music That Speaks To The Spirit"

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 08:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Rants about stealing

Or, howabout THIS timeline:

* Guy steals (ahem, downloads) PhotoShop
* Guy learns PhotoShop
* Guys gets job using PhotoShop, Adobe gets $1000
* Guy steals car
* Guy steals gas (just drives off without paying!)
* Guy gets to/from work for FREE now
* Guy overhears associate's new marketing idea
* Guy steals that idea
* Guy makes a bunch of money from that idea
* Associate gets nothing
* Guy lives out life with apparent lack of conscience

Sounds like the guy just doesn't give a s*** what he steals, whether it be software, tangible items, intellectual property, etc.

So what if Adobe doesn't lose anything? They don't GAIN anything either, because that theoretical PhotoShop job you speak of could have been filled by any college student who graduated with a degree in graphic design and Adobe would have gotten their money anyway.

Your remark about piracy HELPING the industry is foolish. Its not that simple. The fact that there is no tangible item to steal makes people think that its somehow O.K. to do it, and they try to justify it by saying that the company isn't losing any money because of their theft. Big friggin' deal, right? I'm sure that argument would hold up just fine in court and everyone would turn to each other with enlightened looks upon their faces and think to themselves, "Wow, this guy has a point! What are we making a big deal over? Let him go!"

You can argue for or against just about anything in the world in a forum and make it sound good and sweet and justified, but it just doesn't work in the real world where companies produce stuff, tangible or intangible, and sell it to the general public, and where obtaining that product in any fashion other than paying for it is illegal.

You want free software? Go work for some Linux distro company. See how much money they make and see if you can make a living from that. Programming is tough and people like you don't give respect where respect is due, you just take stuff and try to convince people that no one's getting the short end of the stick in the process.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 10:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
Copyprotect = No sale

The music industry bite the hands that feeds it when they time and time again angers me with read/copy-protected cd's for the same bloated price. What came of "We only have high cost because we have to take out the cost for the development". Yeah right. Stick it to the customer and he will go elsewhere now that DVD and games have come into play for your monthly dollars and cents.

Then you have 58 channels that all streams music to your ears all the hours of the day and you can zapp between them. Why should you buy that cd when you can listen to the hit until you are so tired of it that you turn the radio off?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 10:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
EVEN BETTER!

� Guy downloads (steals) Photoshop
� Guy learns how to use Photoshop
� Guy gets job from knowing how to use Photoshop
� Guy makes the coolest graphic known to man for company
� I download (steal) graphic off guys computer and give it to his competition. :)
� Guy gets pissed, I feel good, and justice is served.

Don't you think it would be wiser to go to school to "learn" how to use Photoshop, get some kind of certification, buy the education price which is dirt cheap (plus feel good about self). So a person gets paid to teach you Photoshop, you learn how to use it (faster and legally), Adobe gets paid (even only a little bit) and you own a very inexpensive legal copy of Photoshop, and get a job knowing you did the right thing. If you own a computer.. and obviously a high speed connection if downloading MP3's, then you should be able to afford a basic 4-6 week class in Photoshop, AND if you ARE so poor, you can usually get financing too. :) NO EXCUSES are acceptable.
Mike

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 10:59pm | report spam | close Reply |
Copy protected CD's...

Well it's for the very reason of "I can't afford to buy the CD" excuse that they had to go to that extent to try to make it so you can't download them as easy...
If I was a professional photographer, and someone bought a photo of mine, and then goes and makes 1000 copies for 1/10th of the price, knowing I wouldn't find out, how wrong would that be to me.. it was my creation, my idea.. if you feel their music or Photoshop isn't worth your money, don't buy it, and don't download it.. that easy.. get a job.. save money.. and buy something you want.. it's a strange concept, but that's how I was brought up.. h*** yeah it would have been easier to steal my neighbors mac, but it was just right to work a few months at a low paying job to get it when I was 18.. you value something more when you've earned it..

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/15, 11:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Copy protected CD's.

I HAVE bought the cd and still can not use my right by law to make a backup copy or make a mix-cd for the car or transfer it to the computer/ipod whatever just because some money hungry guy thought up the idea that this would not be noticed be the customer. Oh, let's indoctrine it as stealing. IT IS NOT STEALING: STOP THE LIE!!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 12:32am | report spam | close Reply |
re: Rants about stealing

"Your remark about piracy HELPING the industry is foolish. Its not that simple."

If you think that 1) Adobe or Microsoft somehow didn't know about the MASSIVE pirating of Photoshop and Office, respectively, going on back BEFORE these were considered 'de facto' applications... well, then you're an idiot.

think about this for a moment... if you're Adobe and want Photoshop to become THE standard, then you'll turn a partially blind eye to the pirating going on.. knowing that the more 'mindshare' you have, the more of the market you'll eventually get. Now, I'm not saying these companies are actively supporting piracy, but let's not be naive, shall we? Once the said application (PS, Office, etc) has become the industry standard.. THEN you see these companies getting 'lippy' about all of this.

one of the smartest things Adobe ever did was release Photoshop Elements. Now, instead of either paying $600 or pirating it.. you can spend less than $100 and have a more than capable graphics editor.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 01:04am | report spam | close Reply |
Your limited perspective

"but what you guys don't understand is that if he took your suggestion and used a simpler program like graphics converter then guess what, Adobe still hasn't made any money "

Ok, maybe Adobe didn't make any money, but by stealing Photoshop you just screwed over the author of Graphics Converter because you didn't BUY his software instead. But then again, you are probably the sort that never pays the shareware fee anyway...after all, you wouldn't have ever paid for it anyway. Or, Adobe DID loose money because you didn't buy Photoshop Elements instead.

Let's all just sneak into a few movies, too! But only the ones you'd never pay money to see. That way, the movie industry isn't loosing any money. Or I'll take my kids to the circus. We'll sneak in, but I'll tell them it's OK because we wouldn't have come if we had to pay to get in. We're not taking anything away from the circus, so they are not losing anything. Then my kids can grow up to be just like you!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 08:15am | report spam | close Reply |
Adobe & co

If you can't afford Adobe Photoshop, then, you should buy Adobe Photoshop Elements, it's cheap (and even free with some scanners or digital cameras), and it covers all your needs...

If you can't afford MS Office, then, buy Apple Works or Neo Office...

By copying software from big companies, you are killing smaller companies which sell cheaper softwares :(

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 09:41am | report spam | close Reply |
counterfeit vs. copy

Well, if either the law or the definitions change, and copying MP3's/applications is redefined as counterfeiting, guess what? You are all going to jail. There is no difference in the process, only the definitions.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 10:01am | report spam | close Reply |
no no no

"You guys can chant "stealing is stealing" all you want, but you didn't refute the point that was made: If you were never going to buy Photoshop in the first place, Adobe didn't lose any money from your theft".

let's take this idea back to music. joe rock gets record deal. puts out a single to promote his first cd. 100,000 people buy the single from online music, 25,000 buy the cd. 750,000 people "steal" it from kazaa or some other place. your argument is that these people were never going to buy it anyway so the guy really isn't losing anything. except of course for the fact that no 2nd record is coming cause the sales don't justify it and he's back to washing dishes. you've just crushed joe rock's one big chance. good job. of course it must be easier to swallow knowing that it was not "stealing" but copywright infringement.
i think it's pretty clear. there's usually some posting of "no copying, reproduction, etc in any form...". if you have an illegal copy of something in your possession you are doing harm be it to the record companies, artists, software companies or programmers (how many programmers are out of work because of this kind of stuff?). and the bottom line is it is not yours to have. one can debate this all day but you're either ethical or you ain't. (this "you" throughout is not pointed at anyone, it's a general you)

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 10:25am | report spam | close Reply |
MP3 quality is so poor...

...there isn't much point in downloading for me... Even AAC isn't good enough as far as I'm concerned - if Apple offered AIFF I might consider it - but considering the bandwidth it seems impractical - so I will be buying CDs for now...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 10:36am | report spam | close Reply |
Too Simplisitc

IP theft may or may not result in a tangible loss of dollars. However most are muddling the issues here. IP theft is illegal. There is no legal justification for it. (we must define theft though..)

Whether or not there are potential or real dollar value associated with that theft is another matter. Profiting from the sale of pirated IP is one area that MAY directly and fiscally penalize the owner. Either way it's illegal.

When an IP owner presents an argument for a loss of income based on piracy it's a fallacy of association (correlation) and flawed reasoning. It does, fortunately or unfortunately, appeal to our "common sense" and thus has legs. Still, no DIRECT EVIDENCE of cause and effect exists. YMMV

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 12:32pm | report spam | close Reply |
justification

"They never made money because he would not buy it."

It is stealing regardless of whether or not he would have bought it.

The fact is that if you do not legally acquire the software/music then you are breaking the law.

Whatever justification you have created to explain why you have stolen, it is irrelevant to the reality that you have broken the law.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 12:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
money

There is no legitimate justification for stealing Photoshop.

If you do not have enough money to buy the full blown Photoshop, then buy something else. Photoshop Elements is signifigantly cheaper and should be powerful enough for most people.

If you can not afford Photoshop Elements or Graphic Converter or anything, then you need to go get a job instead of sitting around stealing software.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 01:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
uh...

uh yeah, what ever...

I still love Apple, what do I care about Napster... Junk...

ijournalism... Just too bad it is another knock off... Where is the real journalism? Cheap wanna Bs!!!!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 01:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: no no no

You make the assumption that some of those 750,000 people would have bought the record. Because if you don't make that assumption, "joe rock" is washing dishes anyway. What the pirates are saying is that the distinction is not between "100,000 sold, 900,000 stolen" and "1,000,000 sold". The distinction is between "100,000 sold, 900,000 stolen" and "100,000 sold, 0 stolen". In which case, the artist, or Adobe, is losing nothing. In fact, in the case of music, piracy can lead to greater exposure. I'm not willing to lay out $15 for an artist I've never heard of, but I will download it for free. And if it's good enough I buy it and expose it to all my friends too.

Personally, I buy the same number of albums I did before I started pirating music. The only things that have changed is that I've been exposed to a lot more independent music (RIAA no likey) and now I am buying albums from artists I would have never heard about if it weren't for piracy.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 01:29pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: I agree (Pshop Thief)

Download Fink (FREE), use Fink to install The GIMP (FREE), and you'll be able to do most of what can be done with Pshop. You'll need to load X11 (Apple's is FREE). No one gets hurt....

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 02:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
Piracy doesn't help Adob

Who's the idiot? I'm absolutely positive that Adobe and Macromedia and Microsoft knew about pirating programs since day 1 -- that's where the license comes in as well as the warning verbage that goes something to the tune of, "Unauthorized copying or reproducing is a violation of the license agreement" that's been on the software since the beginning.

Why the h*** do you think that serial numbers have gone from simple 8 to 10 digit/letter codes into hyphenated, cryptic, long-a** codes? It's to deter piracy, not piss off the customer for no good reason. I'm sure that Adobe knows that there's rampant piracy of their software, and I'm also sure that they don't like it or buy into the c*** that it somehow helps their market share. I'm sure Macromedia thinks the same way -- why do you think you've gotta register with them on the phone or internet? Do you think they're waiting at the other end to thank you for pirating another fine Macromedia product and to get your free gift for increasing market share?!

The justification that it somehow helps the circulation and benefits the company is just not working, man. If that's the only reason you can come up with in favor of piracy, then that's one weak-a** case you've got there. The "I don't have enough money" and "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" are excuses, not reasons.

I don't wanna interrupt anything important, since you're busy working up your PhotoShop skills like mad right now with your pirated copy so you can run right out and get that job, right? Have fun making less than $40,000/year for the rest of your life. Here's a suggestion: Go to school. Get a REAL education where they'll pay you what you're worth. Learn how to use PhotoShop the right and legal way. Pay your dues. Be happy.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 02:35pm | report spam | close Reply |
The stolen theory

it comes down to how easy it is to download that song.. those people would probably PAY for the song if it took 20 hours to download each song.. but they figure, hey, I can spent 4 minutes and get the song for "free".. if it wasn't easy to do, too time consuming, they probably WOULD buy it.. many do it because it is fast and convenient... those that download from these illegal services, KNOW it is illegal, but take their chances.. someday they will get theirs in some way, shape, or form.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 05:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Who's the idiot?

"Who's the idiot?"

That would be you. Your post is exactly the kind irrelevant babble I was talking about. You used my post to rant about the evils of piracy. My post wasn't about whether or not piracy was "good" or "bad". It was about the fact that if guys like you want to reply to a post, actually address the point of the post. Somebody wrote about software piracy not costing the developer money. People like you jump in with mindless posts about "stealing is stealing". Yes, and duh. The poster probably recognizes that. That is beside the point since he was talking about the actual impact of the act, not the morality of the act. Try actually reading a post, finding out what the point is, and responding to the point, and leave out your condescending preaching.

Oh... and I don't own, or use, or steal Photoshop. Another example of your idiotic moralizing. But preach on, I can't wait to hear from you what other "evils" you think I am doing.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 06:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Who's the idiot?

You probably smoke crack and kill babies while you're taking photos of the acts and color correcting them in your pirated version of PhotoShop all while listening to illegally downloaded Metallica MP3s on a stereo you stole from a crippled orphan paraplegic. You b******.

The point I'm trying to make is that the people who pirate programs use the excuse that the company isn't losing money when they use software they have no right to use. That's total B.S. When the program is used, money is due to the company, and if the program is being used and no money went to the company, then the company just lost money. If you can't figure that out, then you obviously haven't set foot in any first level business or economics course in any third-rate junior college. Heck, they teach that simple stuff in high school. Its all an excuse and many people probably get tired of hearing that the same that you're tired of me twisting your posts around preaching, so where do we go from here?

I understand that the people who pirate programs have little morals, otherwise they wouldn't be stealing. There's no "well, I don't think I'm hurting anyone so its not against my morals" c***, either, because it's the law, and when you don't like a law, you change it, not blantantly break it. Now, hear hear, let's start a debate on how the government is out to get us but doesn't care about us at the same time and how we're all powerless to change anything about the government, especially some dumb IP law, and how they're just there and we're just here and we're all screwed so I'll just go steal some software. Blah blah blah. You don't get to devise up your own set of morals concerning laws -- opinions, yes, morals no. Its illegal, its immoral and its wrong, and the companies ARE losing money, because the way they MAKE money is by receiving money when people use the software, and well, if I have to put together the fact that when someone pirates the program and uses it without paying that the company loses money, then I'm just arguing with a brick wall. The impact of the act is far greater than the piraters make it out to be, they just don't have the knowledge or experience of managing a company like Adobe and therefore have no business commenting on the financial impact that their pirating has. I, on the other hand, pay for my software and am fully licensed to use it, so I can comment to the tune of almighty greatness and fill my posts with preaches and say that I've given my dues to the company, and I'm damn pissed about people stealing the program and causing Adobe to make me to have to decipher the damn Rosetta stone and then call them on the phone just to activate my new software so that Adobe can make sure I'm really licensed to use it, even though I already have a receipt, a unique and valid serial number and the damn box and CD of the software to prove it anyway. How's that for impact? If you're not al

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 07:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
ehhh

You can argue about morality, but the fact is that stealing intellectual property is fundamentally different from an economic standpoint than stealing real property. Anyone who is unable to see or acknowledge this difference is really not worth talking to.

The fact is that it's actually possible for piracy to help the economy. The absolute ideal situation would be if every single person who wanted Photoshop and "would" pay for it(i.e. if piracy was impossible) did, and if every person who wanted Photoshop and "wouldn't" pay for it was able to easily get a free copy.

The reason is that presumably an application like Photoshop increases productivity in many people. It lets them learn skills with the application and produce very nice images. So as long as it doesn't cost Adobe any money, it sure would be nice for everyone who wanted to use Photoshop to be able to.

Now of course the real world won't be as great as that, but I still think the net result is that most people who are professional graphics artists pay big bucks for Photoshop, and most people who are amateurs without much money pirate it. And in general thats good for everyone, Adobe included.

Comparing stealing Photoshop with stealing a car just shows you've got your head planted firmly up your a**

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/16, 07:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: ehhh

There are perfectly legal ways to use PhotoShop and not pay for it. Every person who wants to use PhotoShop professionally can do so without paying the cost of the software. It's called school, which, through grants and tuition reimbursement and loans can be almost free. Plus, most employers will not have a problem with tuition reimbursement to send an employee to PhotoShop classes or to a university to get a graphic design degree, where the employee can use PhotoShop all day and night until they're bleeding brushes and filters. And, for a DRASTICALLY reduced price, they can take the educational version home with them for their own personal, non-commercial use.

PhotoShop is a professional's tool. It should be used by professionals to generate professional images. It is not intended to be used by amateurs -- that's what Elements is for. ALL of the people I know that use pirated versions of PhotoShop use it for the "cool" factor and don't use the advanced features of the program, much less most of the obvious and basic features. They just wanted the program, and don't understand why this program costs close to $1,000.

There are ways to use and have PhotoShop without stealing it, for very little money or even free. It's just that stealing it is SO much easier to do and there's very little risk of getting caught. But that's the American way, right? The easiest way? Even if it means bending or breaking laws, h***, get it done the easy way. Why go to school when I can sit on my butt in front of my computer and pirate $1,000 programs with the greatest of ease? People start associating ease with legality, thinking that because it was so easy to do, it can't be THAT illegal.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/17, 05:57am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Re: ehhh

Right, elitist a******! You graphic design god, me nothing... Keep your BS attitude to yourself.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/17, 06:33am | report spam | close Reply |
ROFLMAO

"PhotoShop is a professional's tool. It should be used by professionals to generate professional images. It is not intended to be used by amateurs..."

You lost the argument there. Give over. Just because I don't get paid for my work doesn't mean I don't use filters and the features in Photoshop. Who are you to say what I need and use? You really should take a walk as the smell of fertilizer is starting to become heavy from your post.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/17, 10:07am | report spam | close Reply |
P$ Update$ and Upgrade$

I'll stop stealin photoshop when they stop charging $400 for bug fixes.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

11/17, 12:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
Wal-Mart Music Store?

Why Wal-Mart's Music Store won't work:

1) People don't think of Wal-Mart as an online music reseller.
2) It will probably carry only "censored" music to please the American Family Association & the Christian Coalition-just like their physical stores.
3) It probably won't work with the iPod, the #1 MP3 player in the world.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/16	Reuters sources support claims of 4...
05/16	Flipboard 1.9 brings Audio category...
05/16	China Mobile still in talks for iPhone...
05/16	WSJ says Apple has ordered 4-inch displays...
05/16	Samsung and HTC stock nosedive, both...

Show All

05/16	Reuters sources support claims of 4...
05/16	China Mobile still in talks for iPhone...
05/16	WSJ says Apple has ordered 4-inch displays...
05/16	Samsung and HTC stock nosedive, both...
05/15	Retina update also coming to MacBook...

Show All

05/16	Flipboard 1.9 brings Audio category...
05/14	Apple to announce iCloud photo sharing...
05/14	Sparrow 1.2 adds landscape mode, label...
05/14	redsn0w update lets users downgrade...
05/11	iCloud beta site shows new apps; Apple...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

Record, tech industries struggle to earn profit

updated 11:55 pm EST, Fri November 14, 2003

\'Net music sales struggle

Related Articles

Recent Articles

ummm

Also...

re: Also...

Re: ummm

iTunes breaks even...

I thought it was good ...

Who will dominate evt?

I'm so sick of the

31%

Hey now

RE: I'm so sick of the..

re: 31%

It's a fact...

I agree

I agree

Re: I agree

I agree

photoshop

stealing is stealing but?

stealing is

I have it on vinyl and/or

fubar

Re: I have it on vinyl

records/tapes

Photoshop vs iTunes

Re: Music & PhotoSho

Rants about stealing

Apple + Music =

What are you listeningto?

Re: Rants about stealing

Copyprotect = No sale

EVEN BETTER!

Copy protected CD's...

Re: Copy protected CD's.

re: Rants about stealing

Your limited perspective

Adobe & co

counterfeit vs. copy

no no no

MP3 quality is so poor...

Too Simplisitc

justification

money

uh...

RE: no no no

Re: I agree (Pshop Thief)

Piracy doesn't help Adob

The stolen theory

Re: Who's the idiot?

Re: Who's the idiot?

ehhh

Re: ehhh

Re: Re: ehhh

ROFLMAO

P$ Update$ and Upgrade$

Wal-Mart Music Store?

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace