Yoosk today! - Answers

I'd like to ask
393 people in 164 cities are asking questions to 522 people

Login

Username

Password
Remember me
Forgot your password?

Answers

mickthemouse asked Matt Phillips : "For decades record companies dictated the price for music. So why should we consumers feel sorry for record company shareholders who are now losing profits in the download age?"
Matt Phillips answers: "I think you get a lot of file-sharing apologists you make these arguments. You know; record companies made lots of profits in the past so they’ve had it coming to them. Businesses are in business to make..." Show more»" I think you get a lot of file-sharing apologists you make these arguments. You know; record companies made lots of profits in the past so they’ve had it coming to them. Businesses are in business to make profits, that what they do. That’s how the real world works. It’s just not acceptable to steal from people. It’s an alarming trend if people think that because someone is rich that it’s okay to steal from them. "Show less«
Is this a good answer? 0 0
0 comment | Topic: Arts and entertainment | Email to friends | Dec 27 2007 10:36:31 AM

larry1 asked Matt Phillips : "The ability to share albums and songs with friends, make recommendations and debate the worth of a group or artist has long been one of the intrinsic pleasures associated with listening to popular music...." Show more »"The ability to share albums and songs with friends, make recommendations and debate the worth of a group or artist has long been one of the intrinsic pleasures associated with listening to popular music. In the 80s, home taping was predicted to “kill” music, yet the music industry survived (and thrived because of) the humble cassette. Isn’t digital file sharing just the modern day equivalent of this age old practice? " Show less »
Matt Phillips answers: "That was a BPI campaign that was done 25 years ago; the BPI’s copped a lot of flak for it. We tend to look forward rather than backwards, so we don’t tend to talk about that too much. There’s a massive..." Show more»" That was a BPI campaign that was done 25 years ago; the BPI’s copped a lot of flak for it. We tend to look forward rather than backwards, so we don’t tend to talk about that too much. There’s a massive difference between giving a C90 (cassette) to a mate and posting a perfect digital file on the internet for literally millions to take. This does reflect how little people realise what copyright infringement and piracy is all about. People have used the ‘Home Taping’ slogan to undermine very illegitimate arguments as to why file-sharing’s bad for the music industry. "Show less«
Is this a good answer? 1 0
0 comment | Topic: Arts and entertainment | Email to friends | Dec 27 2007 10:34:53 AM

JohnDuffy asked Matt Phillips : "We already have to pay to see artists perform live, so why shouldn't their studio work be free? Professional recording equipment is now widely affordable and distribution costs don‘t exist for downloads...." Show more »"We already have to pay to see artists perform live, so why shouldn't their studio work be free? Professional recording equipment is now widely affordable and distribution costs don‘t exist for downloads. In contrast live performance incurs many costs (venue hire, PA equipment, promotion, transport, etc) and delivers a unique product. In this climate shouldn't artists consider their recordings purely as a promotional tool for their live product?" Show less »
Matt Phillips answers: "Why not? If you want to give your music away for free then all power to you. The point that’s often missed about music and free music is that the record industry has always given music away for free; ..." Show more»" Why not? If you want to give your music away for free then all power to you. The point that’s often missed about music and free music is that the record industry has always given music away for free; whether it’s through the radio paid for through advertising, the television or as free CD samplers. What’s changed is the ability to get everything for free, on-spec, through illegal peer-to-peer file-sharing. What the industry has a problem with is not being able to generate any income, or enough income, in order to be able to invest in new recordings. It’s not actually the consumers right to have everything for free. The very essence of copyright is that the creator has the right to decide what happens to their music. If I want to give my music away for free that’s entirely up to me, but it’s not up to the consumer to give it away for free to millions of others on the internet. "Show less«
Is this a good answer? 0 0
0 comment | Topic: Arts and entertainment | Email to friends | Dec 27 2007 10:33:35 AM

DonLogan asked Matt Phillips : "The recent withdrawal of DRM (digital rights management) by the most major licensee’s allows infinite copies of a download to be made. It seems that free music is set to become the norm, is there any ..." Show more »"The recent withdrawal of DRM (digital rights management) by the most major licensee’s allows infinite copies of a download to be made. It seems that free music is set to become the norm, is there any point in the BPI resisting this trend?" Show less »
Matt Phillips answers: "There are a number of different approaches that the industry has taken. The industry’s not sitting around doing nothing about illegal downloading. This industry is extremely forward looking in terms of..." Show more»" There are a number of different approaches that the industry has taken. The industry’s not sitting around doing nothing about illegal downloading. This industry is extremely forward looking in terms of embracing new digital models, embracing change, developing new revenue streams and working with artists to create new models. That’s what it’s done in the past; the industry has continually reinvented itself through technology, whether it’s the arrival of radio, the invention of the cassette, the CD. Now, the industry’s distribution problems are solved, because you’re one click away from hearing to buying, and that could be the most revolutionary thing that’s ever happened to music. It could bring about enormous growth for the creative industries in general, in that distribution is no longer confined to physical product. In this sense the industry has a great deal going for it. The Problem is the availability of music for free, illegally, on the internet. So what we have to do is appeal to consumer’s hearts and minds, so it’s about consumer education. It’s about making people understand what’s legal and what’s illegal. So we have a big education job on our hands. Then of course we have to control the availability of free music. If there was no store detectives shoplifting would be higher, if there were no barriers on the tube more people wouldn’t pay for their tickets. Enforcement is a very important part of what we do. The BPI has brought legal actions against illegal file-sharers in the UK, which has established a legal precedent and raised awareness. We have to exercise more enforcement in conjunction with internet service provider’s, who are effectively the gatekeepers to the internet. Times are changing; I think that ISP policy makers understand now that you can’t just let people steal music relentlessly without any checks or control. So you need a mixture of enforcement, education and new business models; this is how the industry can go forward. "Show less«
Is this a good answer? 0 0
0 comment | Topic: Arts and entertainment | Email to friends | Dec 27 2007 10:32:48 AM

MTyrrell asked Matt Phillips : "Would you like to see more creators of peer-to-peer and music sharing program authors going to court? Do you think individual users uploading and sharing copy-protected works online should face more p..." Show more »"Would you like to see more creators of peer-to-peer and music sharing program authors going to court? Do you think individual users uploading and sharing copy-protected works online should face more punishment?" Show less »
Matt Phillips answers: "It’s not a question of taking people who invent technology to court, this isn’t a war against technology. Technological change will always happen. Where the BPI focuses it attentions is on people who ..." Show more»" It’s not a question of taking people who invent technology to court, this isn’t a war against technology. Technological change will always happen. Where the BPI focuses it attentions is on people who are wilfully damaging our industry, who are generating significant amounts of money through the theft of music. We’re not against technology; we’re against the people who abuse it. With regard to individual users I think that you’ve got to be measured. Do people buy television licenses because they feel that it is the right thing to do or because they fear prosecution? I wouldn’t propose that we took everyone to court who ever downloaded a song; but I think that you have to implement deterrents to make people do the right thing. So the approach that we have taken thus far has been to take the major up-loaders who have been distributing the most files to court. Copyright law is pretty black and white, so we’ve not lost a case. "Show less«
Is this a good answer? 0 0
0 comment | Topic: Arts and entertainment | Email to friends | Dec 27 2007 10:30:53 AM

PikkuMemy asked Matt Phillips : "I am curious to know, how much music revolution in the internet has damaged record companies profits? Could you give any breakdown? "
Matt Phillips answers: "There are a lot of studies that have been done, and they tend to vary, but we are talking very comfortably in the region of hundreds of millions of pounds a year, in terms of lost sales through digital..." Show more»" There are a lot of studies that have been done, and they tend to vary, but we are talking very comfortably in the region of hundreds of millions of pounds a year, in terms of lost sales through digital piracy. We obviously are not presuming that every download is a lost sale, but results still average out to these figures; it’s a worrying trend. "Show less«
Is this a good answer? 0 0
0 comment | Topic: Arts and entertainment | Email to friends | Dec 27 2007 10:29:48 AM

What is Yoosk?

Yoosk is an interactive interview magazine
which enables you to participate in the
news gathering process by putting your
questions to politicians & celebrities
Six ways to do it
1.Put your questions directly to public figures
2.Get votes for them by mailing & bookmarking
3.Vote for other users’ questions
4.View answers & say what you think of them
5.Join a community of news enthusiasts
6.Submit your own ideas for interview features

Editors, reporters and bloggers
Use our software to set up your own Yoosk
Use our widget to collect your users’ questions
Public figures
Get closer to constituents, fans and customers
Answer their questions directly to webcam

Topics you are talking about:

People you are asking:
Paul Hudson Ian Levitt Margaret Curran Gordon Brown John Mason David Davis Sepp Blatter Tom Watson MP Sir Alex Ferguson Boris Johnson Denis MacShane Sven Goran Eriksson Sian Berry David Miliband kevin Rudd