- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 59,301
- Reaction score
- 26,920
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Perception trumps that, people perceive that they are paying for something that they don't get free use for. They will get it one way or another.
People? What people? Have you ever seen an ad for a cable provider? They start with "Using X you'll get ACCESS to more programming". Here is one:
Comcast to Offer Fans More Access to NHL Network Programming
Comcast to Offer Fans More Access to NHL Network Programming
New Digital Agreement Will Make NHL Network Available to Millions More Comcast Customers
On Demand Programming to Include Condensed Games, Player Profiles, Historic Games and More
As I have said many times, the overwhelming majority of people who are against copyright laws are incredibly ignorant of media itself. They don't produce anything of real value so it's no skin off their backs if artists go unpaid.
No it wouldn't because no one would buy it.
Gotcha. That's why people pay FOR the network and NOT the actual programs on it. Who wants to pay $5 to watch an episode of Grey's Anatomy or the latest Star Trek episode? Think about it this way, advertisement on mediocre shows usually costs somewhere on the upper end of $100K. The fact that networks charge advertisers so much allows them to offset the costs that they'd have to charge you if they actually made you pay for programs.
Made a correction, it's not $30K but $100K.
Last edited: