<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://blog.teledyn.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>TeledyN - Bootlegs and Profiteers - Comments</title>
 <link>http://blog.teledyn.com/node/23</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Bootlegs and Profiteers&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Bootlegs and Profiteers</title>
 <link>http://blog.teledyn.com/node/23</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;If Napster or just the lack of airtight &lt;acronym title=&quot;Digital Restrictions Management&quot;&gt;DRM&lt;/acronym&gt; means artistic content is being rampantly traded across CD-R equipped and broadband networked fans, then why aren&#039;t the media companies showing a drop in profits?  That&#039;s what fellow nanocorp entrepreneur and information architect  Michael Fraase poses in his latest blog entry on &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.farces.com/stories/storyReader$526&quot;&gt;ARTS &amp;amp; FARCES internet : Music piracy not hurting recording industry after all&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By the way, just for the record, it&#039;s not the Grateful Dead who discovered the connection, Michael. This is how music lived for millenia before the artists, with superstars in their eyes, abdicated control to the profiteers.  You may also want to compare the dictionary entries for &quot;pirate&quot;, &quot;bootlegger&quot; and &quot;profiteer&quot; to see who&#039;s who in these debates; so long as we flip these terms around to the entertainment industry&#039;s definitions, we&#039;re playing by their rules, not our own.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://blog.teledyn.com/node/23#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://blog.teledyn.com/taxonomy/term/3">players of instruments</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2002 14:37:33 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>mrG</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">23 at http://blog.teledyn.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
