Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pandora Used to Spend 119% Of Revenue on Royalties

mediamemo.allthingsd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–25 of 25 posts

Re: Pandora Used to Spend 119% Of Revenue on Royalties

#21

Post by tomjen3 »

alain94040 wrote: post #6
yason wrote: post #4

I wish there was a 'compulsory licensing' for individuals for personal use. Pay a lump sum and then you're obliged to receive a license for downloading whatever you want from whatever source you like. If the MPAA/RIAA goons log your IP address and send you a notice of copyright infringement, slam the license on their face, and politely ask them to fsck off.

Would you support the same compulsory licensing for the software you write? Are shareware authors bad people? (I'm trying to push this argument to understand why we need to treat music differently).

Software authors are different from musicians - we don't go to the government and pay money to have our problems fixed by fiat.

So thats why the price should be different too.

Re: Pandora Used to Spend 119% Of Revenue on Royalties

#23

Post by megaman821 »

dustingetz wrote: post #15
j_baker wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between making money and highway robbery. And note that we aren't talking about content producers making money. We're talking about middlemen who serve very little purpose anymore making far more money than they deserve.

nobody "deserves" anything.

You deserved whatever you can get, but you should only get up to the value you provide.

Re: Pandora Used to Spend 119% Of Revenue on Royalties

#24

Post by rick888 »

j_baker wrote: post #17
dustingetz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nobody "deserves" anything.

I'm sure we could have an interesting philosophical or religious debate over that subject, but it's not really relevant to my point. My point is that record labels take far more out of the system than they put in. That's bad both from a moral standpoint of what people deserve and a pragmatic standpoint of efficiency.

According to you they take more out, but the truth is, they put in just as much. Artists willingly go to labels because most of the time, they either don't have the resources or just aren't interested in dealing with everything that has to do with the music business (it is and always has been a business). They just want to concentrate on what they do best: playing music.

Unless you outlaw business, there will always be labels because there will always be an artist that doesn't know how to deal with the business side of the industry. They also might want connections that they otherwise wouldn't be able to have.

Venture capitalists serve the same purpose as a record label, yet this entire forum is based around the industry and nobody here seems to have a problem with them.

Re: Pandora Used to Spend 119% Of Revenue on Royalties

#25

Post by dustingetz »

megaman821 wrote: post #23
dustingetz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nobody "deserves" anything.

You deserved whatever you can get, but you should only get up to the value you provide.

my point was the market determines the value of their services. as such, consumer feelings about what is "fair" may be misguided. I say 'may' because certain issues like, say, the value of healthcare, are too complex for me to judge.
Post reply on HN