|
|
|
Sony and Discovery team up for Blu-ray promotion
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 23 September, 2008
Sony and Discovery Communications have announced a new Blu-ray-based promotion in which all buyers of Sony standalone Blu-ray players will receive a free, exclusive Blu-ray title from Discovery.
The promotion will begin on October 5th and is for "a limited time only." Over 11,000 retailers are paricipating in the promotion including Sears, Circuit City and Sony Style, and when purchasing ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
25. September 2008 @ 12:15 |
Link to this message
|
Ok.. spelling it out.. all those old movies you own are just that.. you own them.
The current thinking is you will only be able to watch a new purchased movie on an approved machine with an internet connection so it can get approval to play from some server somewhere.
That's the meaning of DRM.. you never ever own what you buy. While that may be fine with a visit to the rental store with $5 in hand for an evenings entertainment, it does rankle when you fork out $30 for something which you are lead to believe you actually own.
DRM is not good for the customer. It makes a mockery of ownership and consumer rights.
Now I try to live in a DRM free world, which is my choice. Others who quite happily accept being ripped off and lied to also have a choice. The problem is when it comes to forcing that lack of choice on me.
I don't care if you love sony or love drm or love being stolen from.. that's down to you. Just don't expect me to lie back and get shafted nice and quiet so some suits can get even more rich by taking my, and your freedom away ;)
Do you get it now? It's nothing personal.. sometimes we have to stand up and shout, because otherwise nobody will.
Anyroad.. discovery programming and BD technology. Fantastic. I bet these will look just awesome for those who can afford the technology.
One day, maybe in the dim and distant drm riddled and restricted future this technology will be the norm, sadly for now they are pushing to 1% of the global market. As long as they don't forget to also release on ordinary dvd they can't lose. Trying to push a very expensive hardware format with consumables has always been rather a mistake. The boxes sit gathering dust while people continue to enjoy what they know and are used to.
I would love to go into every house and see a big tv and a blu player running awesome quality media... but it ain't going to happen.. The reality is going to be the 22-24" crt tv rescued from recycling and wasting energy because initial hardware costs are minimal.. That's what I see, not the 52" HD setups.
Not until we get off the oil standard which is allowing multi-billionaire sheiks to rape us all into energy poverty. How blind and short sighted we have been, trusting these monetarists and politicians with their get rich quick short term plans.
I'm angry, it's true.. but not at the people you would think I am angry at.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. September 2008 @ 12:29
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
25. September 2008 @ 13:15 |
Link to this message
|
Varnull. I am not being a jerk. (I usually am) Your statement "The current thinking is you will only be able to watch a new purchased movie on an approved machine with an internet connection so it can get approval to play from some server somewhere." I dont know who's current thinking that is or where they got it from. Some new Blu-Ray movies do require a firmware up date. We do not have to have our player connected to the internet to get the up date. I can get the update on a thumb drive at work, home PC, where ever. Every Blu movie that I have bought so far is still mine & I can keep it, re-watch it, sell it. This is as far away from renting as it gets. I am sorry but I just cant see your side.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. September 2008 @ 13:17
|
|
juankerr
Member
|
25. September 2008 @ 13:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
Varnull. I am not being a jerk. (I usually am) Your statement "The current thinking is you will only be able to watch a new purchased movie on an approved machine with an internet connection so it can get approval to play from some server somewhere." I dont know who's current thinking that is or where they got it from. Some new Blu-Ray movies do require a firmware up date. We do not have to have our player connected to the internet to get the up date. I can get the update on a thumb drive at work, home PC, where ever. Every Blu movie that I have bought so far is still mine & I can keep it, re-watch it, sell it. This is as far away from renting as it gets. I am sorry but I just cant see your side.
I don't think she's referring to BluRay specifically. This device-specific DRM also applies to XBOX Live Marketplace, PS3 Downloads, Apple TV etc. A great majority of BluRay standalones are profile 1.0 or 1.1 and aren't even connected to the internet so it doesn't apply to these machines. Besides, not everyone is opting to put BD+ on their titles. It's mostly the Fox releases that have it - the others don't.
|
Junior Member
1 product review
|
25. September 2008 @ 14:12 |
Link to this message
|
I have yet to find a BD film that requires me to have my PS3 connected online in order to play. I have read quite a bit on how people have been able to rip BDs and save the data for future playback. The consumer circumvention of BD DRM is still quite young. ... but with recorders dropping in price slowly, I can see people treating BD DRM the same way we treat DVD DRM in the coming years. To me, that is how you show the idiots that create DRM they are wasting their time.... its probably more effective than complaining in the comments section on a news article for a product you dont even own.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
25. September 2008 @ 14:58 |
Link to this message
|
Call me slap crazy but I wish DRM would work as intended. I wish people could not copy it and put it on the internet for free. I buy all of my movies. When I pay for mine, I am also paying for what people steel. When you buy clothing or food, you also pay extra for what people steel out of the store. I don't like paying for what people feel that they don't have to pay for. I'm sure they can make lame excuses for doing it, just like I see here at times. When I buy a movie I am paying the Studio to allow me to experience their product. Blu-Ray cost more to produce and I am ok with it costing more than DVD. It states clearly before the movie that I am not allowed to copy the movie or redistribute it in any shape or form. I know that before I buy the product and am fine with that.
For the boy that doubts Oner intentions. Check out his Home Theater/Gaming setup Picture. He has EVERY THING. All consoles, even the old ones.
|
|
13thHouR
Suspended permanently
|
25. September 2008 @ 16:19 |
Link to this message
|
Ok give me the ability to back up my media without having to pay anyone for the privilege, remove the HDMI DRM (HDCP) so i can use what ever screen i want to and not be forced into purchasing new gear because you say i have to purchase a new Bravia, quit it with the phone home snooping, never implement online checks or media locks to single devices, reduce the price of the hardware and media to that of current DVD's and i will take you up on your offer sony, but NO one blu-ray from discovery will ever make me purchase anything.
Originally posted by Hunt720:
I have yet to find a BD film that requires me to have my PS3 connected online in order to play. I have read quite a bit on how people have been able to rip BDs and save the data for future playback. The consumer circumvention of BD DRM is still quite young. ... but with recorders dropping in price slowly, I can see people treating BD DRM the same way we treat DVD DRM in the coming years. To me, that is how you show the idiots that create DRM they are wasting their time.... its probably more effective than complaining in the comments section on a news article for a product you dont even own.
The DRM and forced strict region coding are waiting to be activated , they want to make the format as appealing to convince the populous that its a good, consumer friendly format. The phone home media activation is just an option open to them no studio has yet come forward and stated that they are moving to a long term rent option (ala SecuROM spore). The only studio thus far that has publicly stated that any phone home ability will be used is Fox (News Corp), who said they are going to gather "statistical usage" data to better advertising.
an old but still very valid post from Cory Doctorow can be found here:
HDMI, the Manchurian DRM - a Broadcast Flag dormant until 2010 Quote:
This is a classic Manchurian Candidate strategy. These devices behave like normal gear until the studios pull the trigger, then they turn on you. The studios talk a big game about wanting to operate in a free market, but then you get stuff like this: back-room deals, restraint of trade, and attempts to subvert the market by fooling customers into buying crippled kit.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. September 2008 @ 16:34
|
|
juankerr
Member
|
25. September 2008 @ 16:29 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by 13thHouR:
reduce the price of the hardware and media to that of current DVD's and i will take you up on your offer sony,
I'll hold you to that nobrainer.
Tell you what, when a name brand player gets to $99 or below and new releases get to $15 a pop, I'll personally start a collection from the BD owners here so we can send you the money to buy your gear. It shouldn't take too long - probably by Black Friday next year.
|
|
13thHouR
Suspended permanently
|
25. September 2008 @ 16:37 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by junankerr:
I'll hold you to that nobrainer.
Tell you what, when a name brand player gets to $99 or below and new releases get to $15 a pop, I'll personally start a collection from the BD owners here so we can send you the money to buy your gear. It shouldn't take too long - probably by Black Friday next year.
whatever.
btw its the whole thing if i am paying current prices just to jump through hoops i'll stick with dvd's.
Originally posted by 13th:
Ok give me the ability to back up my media without having to pay anyone for the privilege, remove the HDMI DRM (HDCP) so i can use what ever screen i want to and not be forced into purchasing new gear because you say i have to purchase a new Bravia, quit it with the phone home snooping, never implement online checks or media locks to single devices, reduce the price of the hardware and media to that of current DVD's and i will take you up on your offer sony, but NO one blu-ray from discovery will ever make me purchase anything.
don't worry about the cash i'm going to copywrite fart sounds and make a fortune:-)
Silent music dispute resolved Quote:
Musician Mike Batt had paid a six-figure sum to settle a bizarre dispute over who owns copyright to a silent musical work.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. September 2008 @ 16:41
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
25. September 2008 @ 16:52 |
Link to this message
|
Ok give me the ability to back up my media without having to pay anyone for the privilege, remove the HDMI DRM (HDCP) so i can use what ever screen i want to and not be forced into purchasing new gear because you say i have to purchase a new Bravia, quit it with the phone home snooping, never implement online checks or media locks to single devices, reduce the price of the hardware and media to that of current DVD's and i will take you up on your offer sony, but NO one blu-ray from discovery will ever make me purchase anything.
If you dont pack your BD in a bag of rocks, you should not have to worry about backing them up. Dang near scratch resistant. Im using HDMI on a Samsung. Can hook it to any HDTV with HDMI or HDMI/Componet. Dont hook it to the net and you wont worry about snooping. Blu is so much more than DVD, kinda dumb to say that it should cost the same. Guess you think all vihicles should cost the same. Dont care if you ever buy into Blu-Ray.
The DRM and forced strict region coding are waiting to be activated , they want to make the format as appealing to convince the populous that its a good, consumer friendly format. The phone home media activation is just an option open to them no studio has yet come forward and stated that they are moving to a long term rent option (ala SecuROM spore). The only studio thus far that has publicly stated that any phone home ability will be used is Fox (News Corp), who said they are going to gather "statistical usage" data to better advertising.
an old but still very valid post from Cory Doctorow can be found here:
HDMI, the Manchurian DRM - a Broadcast Flag dormant until 2010
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a classic Manchurian Candidate strategy. These devices behave like normal gear until the studios pull the trigger, then they turn on you. The studios talk a big game about wanting to operate in a free market, but then you get stuff like this: back-room deals, restraint of trade, and attempts to subvert the market by fooling customers into buying crippled kit.
^^^^
Is that a joke. Someones rant on doinkdoink . com. Sounds like a rant from a sore looser.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. September 2008 @ 16:55
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
25. September 2008 @ 16:54 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by juankerr:
Originally posted by 13thHouR:
reduce the price of the hardware and media to that of current DVD's and i will take you up on your offer sony,
I'll hold you to that nobrainer.
Tell you what, when a name brand player gets to $99 or below and new releases get to $15 a pop, I'll personally start a collection from the BD owners here so we can send you the money to buy your gear. It shouldn't take too long - probably by Black Friday next year.
Sure, count me in for $20. Let's get nobrainer a nice Panasonic.
The BD35 should be about $99 by next year:
Panasonic's Profile 2.0 DMP-BD35 Blu-ray player priced at $299
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
25. September 2008 @ 16:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
ematrix
Junior Member
|
26. September 2008 @ 05:54 |
Link to this message
|
13thHouR and varnull, I'm with you. Just one thought to add... if we are and have been paying premium prices for DVD and BD newly released movies, shouldn't they be DRM-free? I can understand and even approve that DVD and BD movies intended for rentals should contain some form of DRM, after all you're kinda borrowing it for a fee and for a limited time, yet when it cames to actually paying to own a copy, regardless if DRM doesn't prevent you from viewing the movie, still we shouldn't be paying premium for DRM content, when it should be the opposite.
That's something that the record industry has finally understood, that they can achieve grander results when approaching a consumer-friendly attitude, yet because of greed, stubborness or fear, the movie industry doesn't. My point is that if you're going to rent a movie or buy a copy for a low fee, yet the condition is that should contain some form of DRM, that's fine by me and sure some people will find it appealing for the price, but when it cames to actually paying premium prices for movies, shouldn't they be DRM-free?
|
|
13thHouR
Suspended permanently
|
26. September 2008 @ 06:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ematrix:
13thHouR and varnull, I'm with you. Just one thought to add... if we are and have been paying premium prices for DVD and BD newly released movies, shouldn't they be DRM-free? I can understand and even approve that DVD and BD movies intended for rentals should contain some form of DRM, after all you're kinda borrowing it for a fee and for a limited time, yet when it cames to actually paying to own a copy, regardless if DRM doesn't prevent you from viewing the movie, still we shouldn't be paying premium for DRM content, when it should be the opposite.
That's something that the record industry has finally understood, that they can achieve grander results when approaching a consumer-friendly attitude, yet because of greed, stubborness or fear, the movie industry doesn't. My point is that if you're going to rent a movie or buy a copy for a low fee, yet the condition is that should contain some form of DRM, that's fine by me and sure some people will find it appealing for the price, but when it cames to actually paying premium prices for movies, shouldn't they be DRM-free?
well... Prof P Gutmann had this to say.
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection Quote:
In July 2006, Cory Doctorow published an analysis of the anti-competitive nature of Apple's iTunes copy-restriction system that looked at the benefits of restrictive DRM for the company that controls it. The only reason I can imagine why Microsoft would put its programmers, device vendors, third-party developers, and ultimately its customers, through this much pain is because once this copy protection is entrenched, Microsoft will completely own the distribution channel. In the same way that Apple has managed to acquire a monopolistic lock-in on their music distribution channel (an example being the Motorola ROKR fiasco, which was so crippled by restrictions that a Fortune magazine senior editor reviewed it as the STNKER), so Microsoft will totally control the premium-content distribution channel. In fact examples of this Windows content lock-in are already becoming apparent as people move to Vista and find that their legally-purchased content won't play any more under Vista (the example given in the link is particularly scary because the content actually includes a self-destruct after which it won't play any more, so not only do you need to re-purchase your content when you switch from XP to Vista, but you also need to re-purchase it periodically when it expires. In addition since the media rights can't be backed up, if you experience a disk crash you get another opportunity to re-purchase the content all over again. This is by design: as Jack Valenti, former head of the MPAA, put it, ?If you buy a DVD you have a copy. If you want a backup copy you buy another one?). It's obvious why this type of business model makes the pain of pushing content protection onto consumers so worthwhile for *said company* since it practically constitutes a license to print money.
and:
Sony BMG's chief anti-piracy lawyer: "Copying" music you own is "stealing" Quote:
Gabriel asked if it was wrong for consumers to make copies of music which they have purchased, even just one copy. Pariser replied, "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," she said.
practically constitutes a license to print money.
practically constitutes a license to print money.
practically constitutes a license to print money.
practically constitutes a license to print money.
practically constitutes a license to print money.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. September 2008 @ 06:21
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. September 2008 @ 06:40 |
Link to this message
|
ematrix. I think that there is a difference between buying the movie and paying to experience the movie. If you bought Pirates of the Caribbean 3 for $150,000,000 which is what it cost to make, then you would have a pretty good argument that you should be able to do what ever you wanted to do with it. I paid $30 for it on Blu-Ray. I'm not worried about my disk getting damaged because I take care of my stuff. I honestly don't think that studios really care if you make a backup but we all know what most really want. Most want someone to copy it and put on a file sharing site so they can get it for free.
|
|
13thHouR
Suspended permanently
|
26. September 2008 @ 08:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
ematrix. I think that there is a difference between buying the movie and paying to experience the movie. If you bought Pirates of the Caribbean 3 for $150,000,000 which is what it cost to make, then you would have a pretty good argument that you should be able to do what ever you wanted to do with it. I paid $30 for it on Blu-Ray. I'm not worried about my disk getting damaged because I take care of my stuff. I honestly don't think that studios really care if you make a backup but we all know what most really want. Most want someone to copy it and put on a file sharing site so they can get it for free.
Now that sounds just like the miss direction of Big Media's Public Relations Spin Tools. If they can get everyone to purchase the same media over and over again they get profit from media that has already been paid for many times over, it's called "money for old rope".
Why do you think that format shifting is illegal because of the DRM and DMCA, which was lobbied for by guess who, the media industry, MPAA/RIAA.
Sony BMG's chief anti-piracy lawyer: "Copying" music you own is "stealing" Quote:
Gabriel asked if it was wrong for consumers to make copies of music which they have purchased, even just one copy. Pariser replied, "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," she said.
practically constitutes a license to print money.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. September 2008 @ 08:40
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. September 2008 @ 09:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
Why would I buy the same media over and over. I buy it once and take care of it. The end. I guess that if you wreck your car, you would go to the dealer and demand a new replacement.
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
26. September 2008 @ 09:07 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The promotion will begin on October 5th and is for "a limited time only." Over 11,000 retailers are paricipating in the promotion including Sears, Circuit City and Sony Style, and when purchasing a Sony standalone you will be given a coupon redeemable for the Discovery BD. The disc will have episodes of Fearless Planet and Sunrise Earth which are nomally seen on Discovery?s HD Theater network.
This is good since the Sony BDP-S350 just got the 010 Firmware update which makes it officially BD-Live 2.0 capable (as promised).
http://esupport.sony.com/perl/swu-downlo...=99&mdl=BDPS350
The Discovery HD programs are some of the best HD nature videos out there with great videography and locations - an excellent showcase for your high def setup.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. September 2008 @ 09:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
an excellent showcase for your high def setup.
True
|
|
bdoggie08
Junior Member
|
26. September 2008 @ 12:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey Nobrainer, would you please stop spamming AD with your biased opinions, I am so sick of your crap-one of these days ur going to get banned again..oh wait-how many times have you been banned from AD anyways? Oh wait..so its happened before right? So that is why your credibility isn't worth anybody's time here right? That's what I thought. Stop...BAN Hammer-time!
|
|
13thHouR
Suspended permanently
|
26. September 2008 @ 15:03 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by bdoggie08:
Hey Nobrainer, would you please stop spamming AD with your biased opinions, I am so sick of your crap-one of these days ur going to get banned again..oh wait-how many times have you been banned from AD anyways? Oh wait..so its happened before right? So that is why your credibility isn't worth anybody's time here right? That's what I thought. Stop...BAN Hammer-time!
thanks for your opinion it's been taken onboard and fully digested.
NOW, please don't use a forum as your own personal insult board to attack other members.
Thank you.
|
|
ematrix
Junior Member
|
26. September 2008 @ 20:03 |
Link to this message
|
glassd, you missed the point... I'm not talking about DRM itself, which of course is not an issue with all the programs that circumvent it, but for the prices we're and have been paying for DVD and BD movies, we should be getting DRM-free content... otherwise, consumers should be paying less for DRM content.
My comment has nothing to do with file sharing, piracy, or porting and backing up movies for personal use, but that consumers shouldn't be covering the expense of DRM, rather the movie industry should do that, after all DRM offers no benefit to consumers, and specially when we're paying premium prices for movies, it sure should be a privilege to have them DRM-free, and not endorse DRM itself.
My point is that consumers shouldn't be paying for DRM, it sure doesn't prevent you from watching a movie, but also doesn't offer you any benefit either; if the movie industry needs DRM then they should cover the expense for it, not us.
We saw this among music fans who constantly argued "If they going to charge $1 a song, it better be DRM-free, otherwise it isn't worth the expense". The record industry understood that, and now they're following a more consumer-friendly attitude with DRM-free music. If given the choice, some consumers would preffer a $15-30 DVD or BD newly released movie DRM-free, yet others would find appealing to pay much less for the same movie, on DVD or BD with some form of DRM.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. September 2008 @ 21:47 |
Link to this message
|
Honest question. My understanding of DRM is that it provents copying of the Movie. What more is it to DRM and what extra cost is there to have DRM on a Disk?
|
|
ematrix
Junior Member
|
27. September 2008 @ 07:02 |
Link to this message
|
The problem overall is that DRM doesn't work, and paying customers are the only ones who are suffering from it. Indeed most DRM intent to prevent you from copying a movie, yet not all DRM does that, such as Regional Coding prevents you from playing a disc from a different region... I'm sure that others can elaborate more about this, yet we can all agree that DRM has never shown any benefit for consumers, and it's more an niussance.
We know that any form of DRM has been develop by several companies such as Macrovision, and they expect to be paid royalties for each disc that includes their DRM... who do you think ends up paying for that? Costumers. The question is why should we end up paying, even endorsing DRM, when it clearly benefits only the movie studios and surely doesn't benefit us?
How much does it cost to have DRM on a disc? To fully understand this, first you have to see the big picture. There are basically three areas of cost: production, pre-mastering (authoring, encoding, and formatting), and mastering/replication.
Authoring and pre-mastering costs are the most expensive part of DVD or BD. A ballpark cost for producing a Hollywood-quality two-hour DVD movie goes from $2,000 to $15,000, depending if includes motion or static menus, single or multiple audio tracks, subtitles, trailers, and a few additional material. Authoring and pre-mastering a movie on BD costs at least $15,000.
DVDs cost about $700, and BDs cost as much as $2,500 per layer to master and setup for replication; DVD-5 and DVD-9 costs under $0.50 to replicate per disc in a 25,000 run quantity. On similar runs, BD-25 costs under $2 per disc and BD-50 under $3 per disc.
Of course the larger the order, the cheaper would cost to replicate the discs; but consider that usually DVD more frequently orders 25,000 to 100,000 run quantities, while currently BD orders 25,000 run quantity at most.
Here's the tricky part... using any form of DRM involves paying an initial fee, which goes from $1,500 to $2,500 per title, therefore if they implement more than one DRM on the disc, the initial fee for each DRM must be paid; even in the case of some DRM like ACCS for BD, those initial fees are recharged each time they do a check disc, and after they start final production, there's an additional fee for roughly $0.10 per unit for each DRM implemented.
Sure doesn't sound like much, but you came to realize that after how much does it cost to produce a DVD or BD disc, they end up adding as much as 50% to the total replication cost per disc, just to cover DRM fees, which reflects in the final price we as costumers pay for movies, because if the producer or movie studio has to invest extra on DRM, it passes that cost to costumers, in order to still profit reasonably from selling the movie.
Again this has nothing to do with file sharing, piracy, or porting and backing up movies for personal use, but if we are and have been paying $15-30 for DVD and BD newly released movies, it sure should be a privilege to have them DRM-free, and not the opposite.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. September 2008 @ 17:11
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
27. September 2008 @ 18:16 |
Link to this message
|
Exelent explination. Thanks. I see your point. I aslo feel that if DRM was good enough, digital theft would not occur and we all would not have to pay extra for that. Once again, thanks. More respect to You.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
1bonehead
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. September 2008 @ 19:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by bdoggie08:
Hey Nobrainer, would you please stop spamming AD with your biased opinions, I am so sick of your crap-one of these days ur going to get banned again..oh wait-how many times have you been banned from AD anyways? Oh wait..so its happened before right? So that is why your credibility isn't worth anybody's time here right? That's what I thought. Stop...BAN Hammer-time!
Please if nobrainer (no longer here) has made biased opinions, please provide documented counter examples (not opinions).
The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above!
The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX.
|
|
