http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/ Politics, culture, surrealism... Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:14:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/#comment-176 Jonny Wed, 06 Sep 2006 09:49:19 +0000 http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/#comment-176 Well it was always going to be DRM encumbered really. You can't build a business model around advertising if your downloaders then go and give the music to their friends *without trying to sell them something*. Well it was always going to be DRM encumbered really. You can’t build a business model around advertising if your downloaders then go and give the music to their friends without trying to sell them something.

]]> http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/#comment-173 DogPatch Tue, 05 Sep 2006 05:03:08 +0000 http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/#comment-173 Actually, I think this isn't going to be very good. Just heard the details on BBC news - forced to watch 90 second advert, Windows Media DRM, non-compatible with Ipods, can't download to CD - this isn't going to convince people to switch away from illegal downloads. Actually, I think this isn’t going to be very good. Just heard the details on BBC news - forced to watch 90 second advert, Windows Media DRM, non-compatible with Ipods, can’t download to CD - this isn’t going to convince people to switch away from illegal downloads.

]]> http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/#comment-165 DogPatch Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:10:22 +0000 http://www.voxpolis.com/2006/music-for-eyeball-time/#comment-165 I completely agree that advertisers have an influence over content - <a href="http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/Corporations/Ads.asp" rel="nofollow">newspapers </a>are another good example of this- but I still think this is a good move forward. It means that artists receive money for their music, something that doesnt happen when music is copied "illegally". Also the internet is large enough to avoid the effects advertisers have over traditional radio, TV and news outlets. I completely agree that advertisers have an influence over content - newspapers are another good example of this- but I still think this is a good move forward. It means that artists receive money for their music, something that doesnt happen when music is copied “illegally”. Also the internet is large enough to avoid the effects advertisers have over traditional radio, TV and news outlets.

]]>