View Single Post
Old 07-01-2010, 08:33 PM   #98
pietvo
Reader
pietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notespietvo can name that song in three notes
 
pietvo's Avatar
 
Posts: 519
Karma: 24612
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Utrecht, NL
Device: Kobo Aura 2, iPhone, iPad
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward View Post
My point is that people are not paying for content with cable. They are paying for delivery of content. Different animal. (for pay channels are different)

For example, someone pay for internet access. They "pirate" some I.P. The fact they are paying for internet access is a different fee (like a cable fee) than for the I.P they are acquiring...
For the channels that you don't have to pay separately, the cable fee also includes payment of royalties for the contents as the cable company has to pay these. Only for special pay channels the royalty will be paid from the fee for these channels.

Now if the youth (or others) are used to this model (you pay a monthly fee for accessing the medium and you get all the content for free) then they may be tempted to apply the same model to the internet: you pay a monthly fee for using the medium and you get most of the content free. And maybe that will become the model of the future, who knows?

Last edited by pietvo; 07-01-2010 at 08:35 PM. Reason: spelling correction
pietvo is offline   Reply With Quote