Filed under: Products and services, Industry, Consumer experience, Rants and raves, Competitive strategy, Marketing and advertising

I read another blog recently that ranted and raved about the request record industry companies recently made to Internet Service Providers to enforce anti-piracy on their servers and networks. The blog was not in favor of that move and I wholly concur that it is not the responsibility of another industry to make up for the problems facing the record industry. True, it would likely be prudent for ISPs to check for anti-piracy issues on their networks, but in the long run it has to be about keeping your own customers and not alienating others with threats against their privacy.

The British government seems poised to deal with the dynamic of this problem directly, after music industry trade groups there asked the government to take action. According to Billboard, the move to fight illegal file-sharing is “intended to ensure the prosperity of the country’s creative industries” by taking legislative action as early as 2009 if the music industry and ISPs do not find a common ground. Legislators have also vowed to protect privacy in the face of these challenges. Unfortunately, the challenges of ISPs providing anti-piracy clean-up for the music industry does fly in the face of privacy issues, even if that means protecting the act of illegal file-sharing.

The Australian government has also taken a similar stance, but is keen to implement a “three-strike proposal” where illegal file sharers would be issued warnings before a suspension of access and eventual cancellation. Still, the plan would require ISPs to monitor user traffic and infringe on privacy issues, reports Billboard. Internet industry trade groups in Australia have also defended the position of not adopting these types of policies or “taking responsibility of illegal operations on their networks” because “present legislation already covers copyright infringement, and these should be used against illegal downloaders.”

Whatever your thoughts on the position of the ISPs might be with regard to anti-piracy, this should not be read as advocating that activity. Simply put, it is nearly pathetic for the record industry to anticipate another industry to sacrifice its business practices because music is being illegally traded and shared. As others have pointed out, some responsibility should be taken by ISPs about regulating users who do break copyright law but “ratting” out users to the music industry isn’t the proper action either.

It is the duty of the record industry to figure out ways to make consumers want to pay for music. Obviously that’s the real crux of these issues, the fact that consumers don’t find value in the music. At least that is the idealistic hope on the part of this writer as to why consumers would illegally trade and share the products. It is obvious that no matter how much freedom the record industry gives digital stores to sell tracks without anti-piracy technology, the tactic is just not working. It’s been a bad year for anti-piracy technology, but that just means a good year for digital stores. While it is hard to see any return from how far things have gone, there is a solution out there and illegal file sharing is not the answer.

In the end, the solution is also not going to be found by looking to blame other industry’s or even the consumer for not regulating illegal file sharing. ISPs are not responsible for the record industry’s problems. If anything, that industry has providing new markets and avenues of advertising for music, so to be bitten at might not be taken too lightly by ISPs. Consumers should not be illegally sharing, but they shouldn’t distrust their World wide web service providers either.

Share This

Share This

Filed under: Products and services, Industry, Consumer experience, Rants and raves, Competitive strategy, Marketing and advertising

I read another blog recently that ranted and raved about the request record industry companies recently made to Internet Service Providers to enforce anti-piracy on their servers and networks. The blog was not in favor of that move and I wholly concur that it isn’t the responsibility of another industry to make up for the problems facing the record industry. True, it would likely be prudent for ISPs to check for anti-piracy issues on their networks, but in the long run it has to be about keeping your own customers and not alienating others with threats against their privacy.

The British government seems poised to deal with the dynamic of this problem directly, after music industry trade groups there asked the government to take action. According to Billboard, the move to fight illegal file-sharing is “intended to ensure the prosperity of the country’s creative industries” by taking legislative action as early as 2009 if the music industry and ISPs do not find a common ground. Legislators have also vowed to protect privacy in the face of these challenges. Unfortunately, the challenges of ISPs providing anti-piracy clean-up for the music industry does fly in the face of privacy issues, even if that means protecting the act of illegal file-sharing.

The Australian government has also taken a similar stance, but is keen to implement a “three-strike proposal” where illegal file sharers would be issued warnings before a suspension of access and eventual cancellation. Still, the plan would require ISPs to monitor user traffic and infringe on privacy issues, reports Billboard. World wide web industry trade groups in Australia have also defended the position of not adopting these types of policies or “taking responsibility of illegal operations on their networks” because “present legislation already covers copyright infringement, and these should be used against illegal downloaders.”

Whatever your thoughts on the position of the ISPs may be with regard to anti-piracy, this should not be read as advocating that activity. Simply put, it is almost pathetic for the record industry to anticipate another industry to sacrifice its business practices because music is being illegally traded and shared. As others have pointed out, some responsibility should be taken by ISPs about regulating users who do break copyright law but “ratting” out users to the music industry isn’t the proper action either.

It is the duty of the record industry to figure out ways to make consumers want to pay for music. Obviously that is the real crux of these issues, the fact that consumers don’t find value in the music. At least that’s the idealistic hope on the part of this writer as to why consumers would illegally trade and share the products. It is obvious that no matter how much freedom the record industry gives digital stores to sell tracks without anti-piracy technology, the tactic is just not working. It’s been a bad year for anti-piracy technology, but that just means a good year for digital stores. While it is hard to see any return from how far things have gone, there’s a solution out there and illegal file sharing isn’t the answer.

In the end, the solution is also not going to be found by looking to blame other industry’s or even the consumer for not regulating illegal file sharing. ISPs are not responsible for the record industry’s problems. If anything, that industry has providing new markets and avenues of advertising for music, so to be bitten at might not be taken too lightly by ISPs. Consumers should not be illegally sharing, but they shouldn’t distrust their Internet service providers either.

Share This

Share This

Filed under: Consumer experience, Time Warner (TWX), Marketing and advertising, Viacom (VIA), Sony Corp ADR (SNE)

Arnold might not be back, but that doesn’t mean a franchise can’t move forward on its own.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Sony (NYSE: SNE) and Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) stand to see some nice revenue generation for their studio segments in 2009 via a new sequel in the Terminator franchise, to be called Terminator Salvation: The Future Begins. Sony will take international distribution chores, while Time Warner will handle the domestic side of things.

As a fan of the Terminator series, I can tell you that it will be great to see another entry. And it will also be exciting to see if the brand can be carried by someone else other than Arnold Schwarzenegger. In fact, Christian Bale is set to play John Connor, the future rebel who battles Skynet and its evil cyborg army.

Bale, as most of you probably know, is the star of Time Warner’s new Batman franchise. He was quite good in Batman Begins back in 2005 — that picture had a worldwide take of about $372 million, according to Boxofficemojo.com — and he’s set to wow audiences again in this summer’s The Dark Knight, where Bale’s Batman will be doing battle with the Joker, portrayed by the late Heath Ledger.

I think it will be tough at first for audiences to accept a Terminator sans Schwarzenegger, but if The Dark Knight hits it big this summer — and keep in mind, the film does have some stiff competition from projects like the new Indiana Jones movie from Viacom (NYSE: VIA) and the latest iteration of the Hulk mythos from Marvel (NYSE: MVL) — then Bale’s star equity will rise and set the stage for a large debut weekend. If Bale was able to reintroduce moviegoers to Batman, then he might be up for this task.

Another Terminator – sounds like money in the bank to me.

Disclosure: I own shares in Marvel.

Share This

Share This