On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 14:35 -0400, Ben Scott wrote: > On 3/25/07, Thomas Charron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The problem is, someone needs to stand up and say 'this ain't > > right'. > > This hearkens back to the wireless phone carrier subthread I > accidentally started. > > As long as people continue to subscribe to the service as it is now, > DirectTV Inc has no incentive to change their ways. > > If people refused to pay for service they couldn't record > themselves, I can guarantee this problem would disappear. > Ben,
I agree, but I think that another part of the problem is the fact that there are monopolies. Sure, in some places there is competition to "DirectTV", but in other places there is not. No cable, no OTA. And to say "no" to DirectTV means that you not only can't tape the show, you can't see it either. And even if DirectTV is not a "monopoly" in the area, the fact that the broadcasting industry as a whole is, and the media industry as a whole is a monopoly (and the government lets them do that) makes the whole thing an "either/or". Then kids cry and wives (or husbands) beat you up. "It takes a village" (or at least a house) to understand and feel this way. Now if a rogue media outlet started making good media (movies, songs, etc.) available at reasonable prices, playable on any device and also did not block you from recording them for personal use, that might give some competition. On the other hand they probably could not deliver them over any of the standard delivery vehicles, since those were already sabotaged by the monopolies, and we would probably as a society have to develop a whole new way of financing the creation of the new movies and songs. Hmmm...isn't there that thing called the Internet? md _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
