And one chapter of that writing says that the quality of sound on iPods absolutely sucks. If your musical tastes run to Britney Spears and other mainstream commercial BS this may not be a problem, but if you prefer that the highs and lows of the sound be present, iPods won't do. Too much compression: even Metallica fans are complaining about their heroes' latest release.
Quality Books Inc.
The Best of America's Independent Presses
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Notaro
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 11:05 AM
To: Jessica Rosner
Subject: Re: [Videolib] copyright AGAIN [Scanned]
ALL businesses are merging and suffering massive cutbacks. Anyone in the music business will tell you they would be in BIG trouble without online content sales. Yes, cd sales are down, and now dvd sales are down. And just as people have been plugging their iPods into cars, instead of popping in cd's, there are iPod docking stations for televisions now. The writing is on the wall.
Jessica Rosner wrote:
> Um Mark
> Record companies are being KILLED, CD sales are off a cliff and the
> money they get from say iTunes is not close to covering it . Record
> companies are LOSING money for the most part , there have been massive
> cutbacks and mergers, it is anything but a thriving business and I
> think that is what Us distributors are very worried about. It should
> be noted that the music market is being destroyed more or less by
> individuals even those pirating on a big scale, schools on the other
> hand have made licensing deals in many cases which of course is what
> all of us would like if all those really big problems could be worked
> On 10/30/08 11:29 AM, "Jerry Notaro" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I don't agree with Mark's analogy either, Jessica, but we have heard
>> the same argument you are presenting from record companies when
>> people started streaming music. Buying and managing music online is a
>> reality and the rights and content holders are making tons of money
>> because of it. If they would have stuck to selling music "only" on
>> cd's, yes, they would be in trouble, but that didn't happen and they
>> are thriving. Much as producers and distributors think librarians are
>> trying to make a fast buck, it is going to be survival mode soon for
>> content providers. People are demanding it and yes, they will pass
>> and choose other content because of the format available.
>> Jessica Rosner wrote:
>>> More like you buy a house on the water in an area zoned for
>>> residential use only, but you decide you can Make a bundle by
>>> tearing it down and building a 5 story hotel and allowing hundreds
>>> of folks to the water.
>>> You are sued because YOU VIOLATED the law that said the property was
>>> for residential use ONLY.
>>> You want to take material marked for home use ( Films) for which a
>>> generous exemption already exists allowing you to Use them in ³Face
>>> to face² teaching instruction IN the class with the instructor
>>> present , rip them off again LITERALLY by breaking encryption which
>>> is unequivocally against the law except for CLIPS for film classes,
>>> digitize and stream them so that students can watch them anywhere
>>> they find ³convenient².
>>> As per previous post I hope you wont mind when after all the small
>>> film distributors are gone because we could not sell 50 copies of a
>>> film a rare film we spent $30,000 to get out ( and that is for a
>>> REALLY cheap one) to universities , the schools decide there is no
>>> need for librarians now that Mega Distributor corp. of America
>>> offers schools one stop shopping where ALL FILMS AND BOOKS are
>>> digitized and you only pay them a few thousand bucks a year to give
>>> your campus access to All of it.. Keep in mind Mega distributors has
>>> of course Merely bought one copy of the film or book , digitized it
>>> and made it available to any campus that subscribes to it¹s service
>>> After all the copy they bought for $
>>> from Baker & Taylor was a LEGAL copy so the school didn¹t even have
>>> to buy that one. No need for rights or librarians, think of the
>>> money they can save.
>>> This is the logical conclusion of taking copyrighted material
>>> ,digitizing & streaming it why would any budget conscience
>>> Institution do otherwise ?
>>> On 10/30/08 10:55 AM, "Mark Kopp" <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> The most important term in your commentŠ²should²
>>>> And on the other side of your ³should², some producer/rights holder
>>>> is claiming they ³should² get paid every single time someone views
>>>> their stuff.
>>>> It¹s the very reason they want the law to prevent us from tampering
>>>> with the ³technological measures². The less exemptions there are,
>>>> the more money they stand to make. It¹s quite simple,
>>>> actuallyŠalways follow the money. In yesteryear, there was only one
>>>> format at a time. Now, formats change with the weather and
>>>> producers/rights holders want paid for the same ³art
>>>> work/intellectual property² with each format change. If they can
>>>> convince the worldŠand the lawŠthat they need paid for each change,
>>>> it¹s in their best interest to demand such recompense and try to
>>>> keep the law on their side. Of course, that means we, as in anyone
>>>> who purchasesŠor are FORCED to purchase due to format
>>>> retirementŠmust ante up for each format change. Those who sell,
>>>> want as much as they can get for their waresŠand those who buy,
>>>> wish to pay as little as possible for those same wares.
>>>> It¹s a damn good thing we don¹t have to buy lumber this way. You¹d
>>>> buy a piece of wood to build a house. That¹s OKŠthose rights were
>>>> secured at the time of purchase. But when you try to use it to
>>>> build a picnic table, you need to repurchase the rights because
>>>> that¹s a format change. Imagine the trouble if you then sold that
>>>> transformative work. The wood was originally sold to build a house,
>>>> but now it¹s used as a table!Šlet¹s not go there right now.
>>>> Now, when
>>>> you wish to also build a bird house, you need to purchase rights
>>>> againŠwhy?...format change!. When you¹re done with the bird house
>>>> and you burn it, be careful!...that¹s also a format change, but
>>>> it¹s a grey area and we¹d need to get a lawyer, or maybe an
>>>> exemption to the Library of Wood Products.
>>>> After it¹s all been said, it¹s still a piece of wood, once a tree,
>>>> and when the forester cut down that tree, it was his intent for it
>>>> to be a house and that was his work and he wanted it to be a house,
>>>> and by damned, he should have gotten paid again, when it became a
>>>> picnic table, and again when it became a bird house, and even when
>>>> it was used as heat. How absurd!
>>>> I¹m lookin forward to Friday!
>>>> Mark W. Kopp
>>>> Technology Assistant
>>>> IT Department
>>>> Appalachia Intermediate Unit 8
>>>> 4500 6th Avenue
>>>> Altoona, PA 16602
>>>> P: 814-940-0223
>>>> F: 814-949-0984
>>>> C: 814-937-2802
>>>> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
>>>> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Anna
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 9:13 AM
>>>> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [Videolib] copyright AGAIN [Scanned]
>>>> As I understand it:
>>>> I can buy a DVD with PPR for the life of the product. Even if you
>>>> stop selling that DVD, if I still have it and it still works, I
>>>> still have those rights. What is the difference with a digital
>>>> file?? It should be the same thing. You sell it to me, you send
>>>> it to me, and I own it along with the rights until it's obsolete or
>>>> broken. After a while, your ownership runs out and you can't sell
>>>> it anymore. But that shouldn't affect the copy I already have.
>>>> Please tell me what I'm missing.
>>>> anna h.
>>>> Re: [Videolib] copyright AGAIN
>>>> Jessica Rosner <email@example.com> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>> Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:55:01 -0400
>>>> <email@example.com> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>> <email@example.com> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>> Well being almost totally ignorant of digital technology it is
>>>> hard for me to say. If in fact this is a format with life span
>>>> similar to VHS or DVd which small companies at least have and
>>>> continue to sell with some kind of PPR rights it might work but I
>>>> suspect that realistically you are really looking towards licensing
>>>> with more specific time frame between say
>>>> On 10/29/08 11:27 AM, "Brewer, Michael"
>>> Proud Resident of a BLUE STATE
>>> Jessica Rosner
>>> Kino International
>>> 333 W 39th St. 503
>>> NY NY 10018
>>> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of
>>> issues relating to the selection, evaluation,
>>> acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current
>>> and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It
>>> is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for
>>> video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between
>>> libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and
>> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of
>> issues relating to the selection, evaluation,
>> acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current
>> and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It
>> is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for
>> video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between
>> libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and
> Proud Resident of a BLUE STATE
> Jessica Rosner
> Kino International
> 333 W 39th St. 503
> NY NY 10018
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.