The other side of the copyright story - the so-called ‘new business models’ - receives relatively little coverage. Moreover, there is little independent research on the real nature of the entertainment industry’s financial problems. The only statistics we have to go on are the music industry ones, and the music industry has a vested interest in those statistics. From a policy perspective, this means that decisions are being made using inadquate information. In this section, I will be logging information about the business of copyright. Unlike my policy analysis, it will consist of short highlights with links. The idea is to begin to get a feel for the financial issues of the copyright industries and how to link them to policy decisions. Thus, it may seem a bit disjointed and sketchy, but the idea is to provide threads for further investigation and to see where it leads. My feeling is that what policy-makers should not be asking is ‘how big a problem is the downloading of copyrighted content?’ but rather, ‘what are the real problems in the copyright business?’.
|
|
Give us State subsidies, say UK film-makers |
|
UK film-makers want to retain their government subsidies - and not pay back. Given that they get massive tax breaks too, and they want Internet companies to contribute to the cost of censorship of copyrighted content, should they get so much public funding? In these austere times, a group of UK film producers is pleading with the government to subsidise film production. The film industry already gets government funding which is effectively a loan, as it has to be re-paid out of revenues. The film producers are now asking to be able to keep the money. A letter to the Daily Telegraph, from the film producers club known as PACT, suggests "that the public sector should leave any returns with the production companies" and not ask for any money to be returned to the public purse. But their pleadings hide the real problem in the film industry, which emerged through a Write Comment (0 comments) |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Disney's $962 million Wonderland |
|
Walt Disney Corporation has reported takings of $962 million for its latest film of Alice in Wonderland, helping to power its latest quarterly revenues to $8.6 billion. Disney has also reported quarterly profits of $968 million, reflecting a profit increase of more than $300 million for the quarter. These figures could give Vince Cable, the new UK Secretary of State for Business food for thought, as he takes his place in the Ministry of Business, Innovation and skills today. Mr Cable will be responsible for the Digital Economy Act and the implementation of the UK's 3-strikes measures. But with the much bigger problem of getting the economy going, surely support for Disney Corporation's already vast profits should fall to bottom of the pile? Meanwhile, I wonder what Alice would have made of deep packet inspection? Maybe Disney could use that in a sequel? Source for Disney' financial results: Financial Times, Disney’s box-office hit lifts profits By Matthew Garrahan in Los Angeles Write Comment (0 comments) |
|
|
BMG goes shopping for music rights with €250 million |
|
BMG, the recently relaunched music publishing arm of Germany's Bertelsmann, has €250 to spend on buying up catalogues of music rights. What can this tell us about the state of the music industry? According to reports in the Financial Times, BMG*, the recently relaunched music publishing arm of German media empire Bertelsmann, has €250 million in venture capital funding. It is seeking to spend this money on catalogues of rights to composers and songwriters in the US and the UK. In doing so, it hopes to challenge the might of the 'big four' music publishers who currently control the music market. The story here appears to be quite a different story from the one that the music industry tells to politicians and policy-makers. It is interesting that in times when Write Comment (0 comments) |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Palm sale exposes 'Net dealings of U2's Bono |
|
The sunglass-wearing Irish pop singer Bono has a clash of financial interests between his Internet investments and his copyright pro-3-strikes stance, as exposed by the sale this week of the computer-maker Palm. Should we call him a hypocrite? U2's Bono is one five directors of Elevation Partners a venture capital company behind Palm, the US maker of hand-held computers. According to US media sources, he has already made $US82.3 million from this investment. The sale of Palm to Hewlett-Packard for $US1.2 billion, agreed yesterday, stands to return his invested capital and net him even more profit. Bono is also sponsored by Blackberry, the maker of a rival product to Palm. U2's manager, Paul McGuiness, is one of the most vitriolic opponents of the open Internet. McGuiness is a key person behind the music industry's push for 3-strikes measures to punish Internet users - for using the very equipment which is delivering this second fortune to Bono. McGuiness has spoken openly and aggressively about his desire for ISPs to be made liable for copyright infringements. How do Write Comment (0 comments) |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Policy Matters 
