File sharers gone Gaga?

Its being reported on Torrentfreak that after a million plays on Spotify, Lady Gaga received just $167.  Of course many file sharers seem to believe that in some way this justifies file sharing and one of the common arguments in the justification of file sharing is that it gives artists/companies publicity.  So how much did Lady Gaga make from being distributed via P2P?  If the argument is that all the sharing is good for publicity and brand recognition and the file sharer has this is mind when they try to “help”[1] why don’t they simply leave sites like Spotify to create the publicity instead?

I think we know the answer to that one and yet again, in my opinion is a weak argument for justifying file sharing (if indeed that one is to be cited by them)

I am still waiting for a file sharer of the “data should be free” ilk who would like to comment on if the T-Mobile story is ok in their books, afterall its only data…..

Of course there are those who believe in some sort of music revolution/uprising, although how the money required to pay all the people involved is to be raised is anyones guess.  Here’s what one user had to say:

It’s only a matter of time before the underground record labels free your hostage musicians and take back the music. There’s no way back; bide your time.

but before we all get too excited by this brave new world….he then goes on to say:

Also, I’m drunk, so you know I speak the truth.

This is the sort of level we are talking about.  There is no argument in my opinion for justifying file sharing.  The flaming, vulgarity and libelous remarks of some of those that support it prove that in my opinion.

Massive lawsuit for Microsoft?

It was recently reported that Microsoft conducted a switch off of around 600,000 Xbox 360’s which were modified/chipped.  Now whilst that on the surface may seem like a blow against piracy, there are others with different ideas and offer a more sinister reason for Microsoft’s switch-off.

Abington IP, a firm who specialises in “intellectual property law & consumer class actions” have said (on their site):

If you are an Xbox Live subscriber, had your modified Xbox console banned from Xbox Live, were not refunded a prorated sum for the time left on your subscription or have experienced other problems as a result of being banned, and would like to participate in a class action against Microsoft, please submit your information…..

they also say:

Microsoft has chosen to use one of the most indiscriminate “weapons” in its arsenal in an effort to combat piracy — as a result, use of this “weapon” has resulted in a great deal of collateral damage — many people were affected who had nothing to do with piracy. Furthermore, Xbox console functions that have nothing to do with piracy were also affected or disabled. Details aside, Microsoft’s bans could (and should) have been more measured.

So this news may come as another concern for Microsoft, who saw the Xbox360 slammed on the net for the “three rings of death” and the amount of returns that resulted in faulty units.

There may be a more sinister reason for the Microsoft switch off that I would like you to consider.  Picture the scene, you have the release of one of the biggest titles of the day, Call of Duty Modern Warfare  (apparently smashing all records in Hollywood) and you have the Xbox 360 and its users who have modded the console…now what would happen if you turn their facility off to play the aforementioned blockbuster title?  Could it be suggested that users would go out and buy another 360?  I’ll let you decide, but it could be argued that “every little helps” when the next set of quarterly figures from Microsoft get released.

If Microsoft are claiming that this switch-off is some strike against piracy, let me remind you of what Bill Gates said about that subject:

As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They’ll get sort of addicted, and then we’ll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade.

So in my opinion Microsoft are the last ones to talk about piracy.  I wonder if this switch-off is an attempt at “collecting”?

Microsoft scared by Google?

I touched on this in a previous article here, however it does seem that Andre Da Costa [2] echo’s Microsoft fears.  It is being reported that Microsoft has made the following statement in respect of GoogleOS:

From our perspective, however, our customers are already voicing their approval of the way Windows 7 just works  across the Web and on the desktop, and on all sizes and types of PCs purchasing twice as many units of Windows as we’ve sold of any other operating system over a comparable time.

Of which I would suggest, that when XP was sold there were fewer users than there are today (social media and the net has been responsible for the massive interest in computing by many, which was not at the levels then as it is now)  I would also say that people read the reports of Vista being a pig and were put off buying it.  I don’t think its surprising information that more copies of Windows 7 would be sold.  Of course, Microsoft use the words “from our perspective” – and we all remember where Microsoft perspective leads don’t we?  Wasnt it Steve Ballmer who said they got the wrong impression from early feedback of Vista?

I think Microsoft needs to be very careful of their perspective.  You can read all about Mr Ballmer [3] “getting the wrong end of the stick” over at Bloomberg http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=axIIsgv3cQIc

The original Openbytes article is found here and I wonder if Microsoft comments were what Andre was referring to.

Notes

[1] – Helping often involves the file sharer downloading material that under normal circumstances would cost them money.  God bless, them they are really modern day martyrs!?!?!

[2] Andre Da Costa has admitted to nymshifting on CNET with the name Mr DEE.  Both him and “Mr DEE” promote Microsoft technologies.  Whilst its not believed (by me) that he is directly employed by Microsoft, a visiting Wintroll here (Richard) implied he was in his last comment.

[3] Of course Mr Ballmer has no similarity with Lord Vader.  Mr Ballmer has to throw chairs, Lord Vader can lift them with the power of the force. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/05/chair_chucking/

Goblin – bytes4free@googlemail.com