As some of you know, I’ve been bitching up a storm about Netflix’s decision to give in to Warner Bros. demand that they not rent new release DVDs until after a 28-day window has expired. Today, Redbox, has announced they’ll do the exact same thing. Simply put, this is another blow to consumers and a big potential win for piracy.
Naturally, Warner is playing this up as a win for everybody. With this 28-day window, Warner now has the opportunity to try to sell more DVDs, while at the same time offering more video-on-demand options. Meanwhile Redbox ensures that it will be able to keep offering Warner content and be granted more access to it. In exchange, Redbox simply has to agree not to rent Warner movies until 28 days after they’re released — oh, and drop that pesky lawsuit again Warner for trying to prevent them access to their movies. Hugs all around, right? Wrong.
Make no mistake, Redbox did not want this deal. Their hand was forced by Warner. But really, what else were they going to do, just not offer Warner titles while their competitors did? From their perspective, a 28-day window is undoubtedly better than no window at all. But what this really is is another example of a movie studio shooting itself in the foot. Warner believes that these windows are going to allow them to sell more DVDs, long the bread-and-butter of the movie industry which is now in rapid decline. The thought is that people are no longer buying as many because it’s so easy to rent them. So if you make them harder to rent…
The problem with this is at the fundamental level. People aren’t buying fewer DVDs on a large scale because of rentals, they’re buying fewer ones because most DVDs aren’t simply worth owning. And consumers are finally waking up to that fact. Do I want to own Sherlock Holmes? No. Will I rent it? Yes.
The Netflix agreement with Redbox actually makes more sense since they’re all about getting more streaming titles from the studio. They want this because that’s the future of the business and from a business perspective, new releases make up only 30% of their rentals, with the other 70% coming from older catalog films, many of which they can now stream to customers. Of course, if other studios cut the same 28-day deal with Netflix, it’s going to decimate the top rental list. And while plenty are quick to say, so what? Make no mistake, this will lead to more piracy.
Further, while part of Netflix’s agreement with Warner was supposed to lead to better availability of these new releases after the 28-day window, the opposite appears to actually be happening. The first two movies that fell under this new rule, The Invention of Lying and Whiteout, were recently granted Netflix availability. So you can rent them right now, right? Nope. The Invention of Lying has a “Long wait” while Whiteout has a “Short wait.” It seems that there is some pent-up demand to rent these new releases that Netflix wasn’t expecting. Both movies, meanwhile, were immediately available to rent through iTunes a month ago, which didn’t cut this silly deal.
Here’s what Warner has to say:
Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group and redbox today announced a new multi-year distribution agreement that will make Warner Bros. new release DVD and Blu-ray titles available to redbox customers after a 28-day window. The agreement also marks the end of the lawsuit that redbox filed against Warner Home Video in August 2009. Below is a copy of the press release with additional details.
Here’s the release:
WARNER BROS. HOME ENTERTAINMENT AND REDBOX ANNOUNCE A MULTI-YEAR DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
Companies Agree to 28-Day Window for DVD and Blu-ray Titles
BURBANK, Calif. And OAKBROOK TERRACE, Ill, February 16, 2010 – Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group and redbox today announced a new multi-year distribution agreement that will make Warner Bros. new release DVD and Blu-ray titles available to redbox customers after a 28-day window. The agreement also marks the end of the lawsuit that redbox filed against Warner Home Video in August 2009.
“We are very pleased to have had the opportunity to sit down with redbox and negotiate an arrangement that benefits both parties and allows us to continue making our films available to redbox customers,” said Kevin Tsujihara, president, Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group. “The 28-day window enables us to get the most from the sales potential of our titles and maximize VOD usage.”
The new arrangement provides redbox with reduced product costs, sufficient quantities of product and optimal stock levels four weeks after street date as well as extends redbox’s access to Blu-ray titles, which redbox is currently testing in select markets. The agreement also provides Warner Bros. the opportunity to maximize the sales of new release titles as well as video on demand and other forms of digital distribution.
“This agreement enables redbox to fulfill our commitment to providing consumers affordable and convenient home entertainment,” said Mitch Lowe, president, redbox. “By agreeing to a delayed release date, redbox can now acquire Warner Home Video titles at a reduced product cost, preserving value for our consumers and increasing customer access to Warner titles at redbox locations nationwide.”
Warner Home Video and redbox will be implementing delayed availability during the month of March and will reach a four-week window by March 23 with the release of The Blind Side. The new agreement will run through January 31, 2012. Redbox has also agreed to destroy Warner Home Video content following its lifespan in kiosks.
“The 28-day window for redbox balances the economics of our relationship while continuing to offer great value to their customers,” said Ron Sanders, president, Warner Home Video. “This accord establishes a mutually beneficial relationship that will foster an ongoing and productive partnership.”
Warner Bros. is currently a leader in many home video categories including total video (DVD and Blu-ray combined), Theatrical Catalog video, TV on DVD, and Blu-ray and will ensure the DVD rental company access to sufficient quantities of Warner Home Video titles including The Time Traveler’s Wife, The Box, The Informant!, Where the Wild Things Are, The Blind Side, and Sherlock Holmes.
About Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group
Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group (WBHEG) brings together Warner Bros. Entertainment’s home video, digital distribution, interactive entertainment, technical operations and anti-piracy businesses in order to maximize current and next-generation distribution scenarios. An industry leader since its inception, WBHEG oversees the global distribution of content through packaged goods (Blu-ray Disc and DVD) and digital media in the form of electronic sell-through and video-on-demand via cable, satellite, online and mobile channels, and is a significant developer and publisher for console and online video game titles worldwide. WBHEG distributes its product through third party retail partners and licensees, as well as directly to consumers through WBShop.com.About Redbox
Redbox Automated Retail, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Coinstar, Inc., offers new release DVD rentals through its network of conveniently located, self-service kiosks. Redbox has rented more than 500 million DVDs and is available at more than 20,200 locations nationwide, including select McDonald’s restaurants, leading grocery and convenience stores, and Walmart and Walgreens locations in select markets. For more information, visit www.redbox.com http://www.redbox.com.
[image: Warner Brothers - funny, yes]
Who cares. Read a book.
Awesome man, a book is still the best value – not an ebook that you don’t really own, but the real thing in paper.
Hey Warner Bros. You know that revolver you got pointing at your foot? You just fired it for the 4th time.
I STILL don’t see why this is such a big deal, MG. Maybe you want to write a post on why you’re harping on it? As I said on your last post about this topic:
When I want to see a movie, I just add it to my Netflix queue–I don’t pay attention to the date on which it’s going to be released at all. If I’m in a hurry to see the movie, I go see it in the theater. If I’m not, I’m already waiting for a few months beyond its theatrical release to see it, and 28 days one way or the other is going to make exactly zero difference to me.
Put another way, I never buy newly-released DVDs (the only DVDs I own are old favorites that I’ve seen several times and know I’ll want to see again), so the day they show up on NetFlix (or Redbox) is the day that they are released on DVD, in my book. I’m not going to get my panties in a bunch over the fact that I’m seeing a movie a few weeks after some other people are. (Why should I care? A movie’s going to be just as good 4 weeks from now as it is now.)
Exactly. This guy is trying so hard to push his agenda to make this some big deal. Forget gay marriage and global warming! I have to wait 28 days to watch Will Ferril in his underwear!? IT IS THE END OF DAYS!
Does anyone else see the Irony on the two issues he felt were some sort of life changing huge world issues and the netflix deal?
“I never buy newly-released DVDs” that’s EXACTLY why the plan is so dumb on Warner’s part. While you may not care about a movie’s release date, those that want it now will turn to piracy.
I seriously doubt the number of potential pirateers will increase because the rental release went from 3 or 4 months out to 4 or 5 moths out.
The lowlifes that want it free are really not waiting now.
The people that want it now want it now, not 28 days sooner than 5 months from now.
People who download movies are not lowlifes. They are people who are tired of paying $120 cable bill for shitty old movies and wasted channels with nothing on them. They are tired of paying $23 for a movie thats sucks( remake ) and have to watch 15 mins of ads before they get to see the first preview.
They are people who are have a large collection of DVD’s and VHS of there fav movies which they payed for and now these movie company want you to pay again for the same content. People learned there lesson and will not pay for something thats not worth it. $30 for a blueray is to much. 5.99 for a HD movie download that has DRM on it,not worth it.
The Movie Company’s need to rethink there business model and think different and stop trying to rap there customers
I do pay for stuff thats worth it. How about you?
I completely agree with your view on this.
100% Agree!!!
100% Agree.
I used to own quite a bit of movies (and I even managed to catch a movie at the theatre every other week). I have a VHS sitting of “Raging Bull” sitting in a box in my attic. I wanted to watch it recently because I’m a Scorsese fan and Shutter Island is coming out. I don’t even own a VHS player any more. I check Hulu–its not there. Its not on any of my movies channels (I’m a sucker who bought them all)So what am I to do?
I google it. I find a stream of it. I enjoy watching it. I am hardly a low life. I refuse to pay for DVDs anymore though. Less than ten years and we’re already on blue ray– where will we be in ten years? Deliver me content with advertising if necessary or let me subscribe and watch streams whenever I want. I’m not a low life, but I’m not a sap either.
You forgot one very important thing….. Most of the movies released on DVD/BluRay aren’t worth the time, energy, or effort to copy. Movies these days really do suck. By the time the 28 days have past, I will have already forgotten about the movie any way.
I think you should stop watching movies for a year and go back to 3rd grade. Your excessive spelling and grammar errors detract the viewer from the points you are trying to make.
I completely agree with those who’ve stated that the movie studios need to wake up and smell the roses. People like me (and there are a LOT of us) have the power now and it doesn’t really matter all that much to us which tactics they try to use to extort more money out of our wallets. Someone said it eloquently when they said that we’ve realized we don’t want to pay $120 for crappy cable, $20+ for crappy DVDs we’ll watch once, or even $5 to rent a movie. We want to pay, at most, $1-2 a film and we want to decide when we watch it and how we watch it. For any studio people reading this I only watch exceptional movies in the theater, other than that I will wait as long as necessary to watch it on Netflix or via Redbox. Or, in those cases that my access is limited to a certain movie through legitimate means (i.e., Redbox or Netflix which are as much as I am willing to pay) then I happily download movies illegally. And no, this doesn’t make me a deadbeat, it makes me a rational consumer operating according to my incentives.
So studios, if you want to extract as much revenue as possible out of people like me, make it easier to get movies from Redbox and Netflix because you can either get $1 from me or nothing at all. There is no $20+ extraction option from many of us consumers anymore. If we want to keep something we’ll either download it or rent it and rip it. Learn to move on, find a new cash cow.
no one cares – why can’t you see that?
Dumb logic is dumb….
If they were going to pirate that would of done it when the movie hit theaters not the DVD release date.
That is stupid. You really think that most people pirate a shitty shakey cam version of a movie in theaters? I’d say most people pirate a movie when the DVD version becomes available online, when do you think that is most likely? While the movie is in theaters or when the DVD is out?
Also if you find out that you cannot rent the movie when it is released but you really want to see it right now what do you do? Go and buy the DVD like the studios want or just hit up the Pirate Bay?
Think.
Yeah “think”, you wait 5 month for it to come to DVD since you didnt want to see it in theaters, but cant wait 28 days? Please this is such a non issue…
And shaky cam? what year is this 2004?
Most grab a cam then grab the dvd image when it comes, usually months before its actually released. Most of the movies mentioned in the article have already been uploaded, none of them are worth even stealing imo, which is pretty sad testament to the quality of product coming from these studios.
Your logic is utterly faulty. The people who care enough to get ahold of a movie ASAP and are open to pirating already can and do pirate the movies BEFORE the DVD release date.
Besides – movies already take 4-6 months to come out on DVD – most people don’t pay much attention to official release dates and they will just wait another month without much concern.
I agree.
When new movies of interest come out, I usually go to netflix and throw them in my queue – knowing I will have then in 1 or 2 days.
If the movie is already out, but I’m not going to get it in my mailbox for 30+ days. I’ll just go to TBP and grab it.
I don’t buy DVDs anymore, I haven’t for a few years, and my friends don’t either. When you can stream it from netflix or have it in your mailbox the next day, what’s the point of throwing down $22+ – it’s just stupid.
If all my friends are talking about how Sherlock Holmes was so amazing (after the DVD comes out) – yet I can’t get it from netflix for an additional 3-4 weeks am I going to go pay $25 to buy it? Hell no, I’ll download it.
Idiots.
The product belongs to Warners, not Netflix. If that’s what Warners wants to do, so be it.
What’s the big deal? That you can’t get the film via Netflix immediately?
Do you remember that it wasn’t so long ago that a DVD version of a film wasn’t available for half a year after the theatrical release?
It’s a free market. Let them do what they want. If consumers don’t like it, Warners will suffer.
Why the TC theatrics?
It’s just what bloggers and cable news talking heads do. 99% is much ado about nothing.
well, exactly, warners will suffer. with no increase in dvd sales but an increase in piracy.
They are not likely to be aiming for an increase in sales, rather just the maintenance of people accustomed to buying the DVDs on their release date. This is not a big deal. They are having their cake and eating it too. They can continue taking the small chunk of revenues that come with a big DVD release and then in 28 days people who decide they want to stream it can now do it.
If anything this is progress because they are slowly letting the strangle grip they had on streaming movies free through companies like Netflix and Red Box.
Its a compromise.
If it were a “free” market, Warner would not be able to prevent Netflix from purchasing their product for 28 days.
@acidboy – in a free market, sellers can sell what they want, when they want.
@McBeese: You seem to be confusing the economic concept of a free market, where there is no discrimination, perfect knowledge, et c, with free market a la Hobbes: nasty, brutish, and lethal.
If I remember correctly this issue was started off by Blockbuster complaining to the studios, or does Warner own BlBstr, can’t remember but the issue was targeting redbox and netflix as a measure to assist BlBstr with their new releases which they get earlier. So this is not free market, but rather controlled price and availability fixing at the expense of independent suppliers. Highly suspect given the anti trust laws of your country. Of course it will increase piracy, people are fed up with an overvalued product packaged and repackaged with no added value, incentive or ownership, dolled out at intervals ment to benefit their pockets and not consumers. So yes suffering will happen, to netflix, redbox Blbstr and Warners and ultimately the consumer as there will be no more good movies made anymore, sobeit let theirs and our greed undo us all.
I think he’s trying to say that “Warners” will suffer and is offering up a reason why and how to avoid it…
Well, it belongs to Warner, but courts have ruled long time ago on something called the first sale doctrine, which allows you to resell or rent the media that you buy. So in that sense Warner could not force Netflix into a deal they did not want. What really happened, Netflix negotiated a way to get access to digital content that they did not have the “fair use rights”
to distribute, in exchange for almost nothing – 28 day delay.
Sounds like a business decision after looking on a few pie charts by both sides.
The only reason why MG is “telling” them how wrong they are is because bloggers have this need to be “telling” people how wrong they are.
And idiot commenters have this need to be “telling” other people how wrong *they* are.
Warner was also supposed to allow more streaming content for Netflix.
Where is it?
I want technology news, not MG Siegler’s ongoing gripes about things that get his knickers in a twist.
I don’t see this as a big deal either. I can wait another month to rent the movie. In general, Warner Bros. will realize it has zero impact on their DVD sales, and then realize people have determined it’s just dumb to buy movies.
I think this deal benefits redbox greater than netflix…but they’re both screwed. I’m curious to see how many customers they lose to online streaming like netflix did last month. Can we get those figures posted when they come in?
of course. streaming growing fast http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/03/comscore-netflix-streaming/
Ah, yes. More of the expert analysis that Techdirt is known for. Or . . . TechCrunch? Wait.
Well daesin was right, but I can feel safe saying that Warner Bros. is going to get hell for their actions. Most of their DVD “sales” are from rentals anyways. They can expect their sales to drop a good amount, and they can also expect an increase in piracy, too.
I agree with this article. Most movies are NOT worth owning these days. We purchase MAYBE 1% of the movies we watch. No wait, it’s can’t even be 1%. Warner Bros is just a greed machine. Every day we are getting closer and closer to the CSA: Corporate States of America.
For me, this just means new releases actually come out 28 days later than when published.
I haven’t rented a movie in over 6 years. Utorrent is MY redbox. Suck it MPAA.
LOL This did make make me laugh.
Again, with regards to Netflix, who cares?
Everything shifts +28 days, my queues are still full, I’m still paying for 3 discs / month. If I can’t wait to see a movie, I’ve already seen it in the theater.
Now this could end up hurting Redbox a bit since they are not subscription-based and won’t be able to piggy-back on the DVD release advertising to help drive rentals from their machines.
Maybe that was Netflix’s insidious strategy all along
maybe it was netflix’s strategy since they are by far the best positioned of these companies to make the shift. point is, it’s just dump to temp piracy on warner’s part.
Anyone know if Blockbuster is cracking the same deals with studios?
as far as i know, not yet. but blockbuster has its own mountains of trouble (their retails stores)
Studios would be hard pressed to offer Blockbuster a deal that could kill their online model because Blockbuster would have to explain why their customers would now be forced to rent from the retail chain for new releases.
In any case, Blockbuster’s troubles are consumer’s fortunes. I’m not sure if this is the outcome studios are looking for. Do we know if any of them are BBI shareholders?
Everyone just stop making movies for Warner. Screw them.
Why doesn’t Warner just buy up large portions of stock in Redbox and ensure survivability?
Question:
Can people buy a DVD and rent it out to others? If not, is there special kind of rental DVDs that needs to be bought?
I think it is considered fair use, so anyone can buy dvds and open a rental store. No fees to the movie industry, or any special licenses where they get to tell you what you can and can not have in the inventory.
Of course, they could offer you a sweeter deal than retail disk prices if they want you to have a certain inventory.
Yeah. Still don’t care.
With Netflix, the nerdrage that the author (and seemingly no one else) has around this issue was based on a foolish assumption about the usage habits of Netflix subscribers, despite the ‘evidence’ that the author attempted to conjure with a few clicks worth of searching.
With Redbox, the same piece of reasoning is still just as false. Waiting another month after the ‘release date’ doesn’t make the title any more difficult to rent, not does it entice people who might have been willing to rent it to go buy it instead. Ownership and rental are different mindsets entirely and are not interchangable merely because there’s a delay involved. Nor is it any worse for consumers to ask them to wait to rent something that they aren’t interested in owning.
My magic 8-ball says that absolutely nothing is going to happen here. DVD sales won’t increase and no rental company is going to lose business, except perhaps to other rental companies that haven’t signed this deal yet. And I think it’s reasonable to think that Warner will seek this deal with all of them. Consumers will mentally tack on an extra month to whatever Warner says the release date is for their films and then promptly forget the whole thing.
Until it’s a slow tech news day again…
Actually, usage habits (30/70 on new releases) is housed within the NFLX 10-K – one of those pesky little documents that allow us to see how public company’s are operating. . . . .
But netflix is likely to see higher % of profits in their revenue stream, which tends to be important for people on wall street.
I think you missed the point. The entire point of the article is that the studios (well WB right now) is pushing this 28 day window to drive more sales. The problem is all that they will do is increase piracy.
People like you will wait an additional 28 days and not care, people who want to see it RIGHT NOW will hit up a torrent for their copy. There doesn’t seem to be any upside for anyone with these deals.
At least that is my take on the story.
DVDS ARE DYING.
That’s why we’re building Vidli…to help you buy, sell and rent videos online – through an OPEN video licensing platform.
There is a better way to do rentals – and that’s what we’re working on.
We’re in Public Alpha right now…would appreciate any/all feedback..Beta Invites Available Here…
http://vidli.com/TC002
I don’t understand why if a movie is available via Redbox it solves the piracy problem, but if the same movie is available for rental at iTunes, it has no anti-piracy impact. Just fyi – watching movies at home existed before Redbox.
Also, why does this post keep changing headlines and body? Very strange. Very professional.
Arghh. I’m still PISSED at Netflix over the fact that the majority of the movies in my queue are Long Wait or Very Long Wait. Seriously like the top 10 movies on my list. What the hell is that about?
Needless to say if I can’t get the movies I want in reasonable time from legit sources I will obviously be looking to alternatives. It’s not unreasonable to expect Netflix to have enough copies to satisfy demand.
That’s a big reason they gave for doing this deal… they will have 28 days to get to 100% inventory at all of their distribution centers… hopefully making the “new release lotto” a thing of the past.
Interesting. Thanks for the info.. I was wonder if this long wait disaster was the 28 day thing in effect, or if they were just unable to meet demand. I assumed that if there was a 28 day they would have factored that into the “Releases on 2/17/2010″ message instead of showing it as Long Wait. Sounds like that is what they are doing.
“The Netflix agreement with Redbox” – FAIL
Didn’t you know that you can now stream Netflix movies directly to the Redbox in any Safeway?
I was always under the impression that once Redbox owned a DVD they could do whatever they want with it – i.e. rent it. They do not special agreement from the movie distributor.
If this is the case, why did they sign this deal, if they could just buy up stock of discs from whever and rent them immediately for greater demand (as netflix customers cant)?
Am i missing something?
It is possible they got a discount over retail disk price if they agree to delay distribution.
Also, redbox is, I suspect, much smaller than netflix, maybe not even profitable yet, and likely unable to sustain long legal fights, even if they are not doing anything wrong.
It is annoying that the Netflix sub. I pay for does not have the same content as iTunes. It is creating another tier of service that ends up lowering the value of my subscription. Many people know when new release are coming out and before they could get them. Now they can’t. As Lando Calrissian said “This deal is getting worse all the time.”
So? Its not like you have a long term contract. Go rent from itunes if it works better for you. Or just watch youtube lolcats.
Sherlock Holmes is a really good example. I don’t expect it to have a replay value. I don’t care about deleted scenes, behind the scenes, or anything else they could bundle with a full DVD purchase. I just intend to watch the movie. I will rent it from Redbox, and I will do so whenever it becomes available. I don’t care when it is, or if it means that other people will get to see it first. People have already seen it in the theaters, and if I were in that much of a rush, I would, too.
What I don’t see is how this is a blow to Redbox or an invitation to piracy. I think TC is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Traditional media still thinks it can make a mint by selling content that isn’t worth the sticker price. Old meme, new medium.
Actually, I get this. I’m willing to spend $1 to rent a newly-released movie from Redbox, but not willing to pay to see it in a theater or buy the DVD. This is less about Netflix junkies and more about the fact that I only won’t pirate a movie prior to its DVD release because the quality will be awful. When I want to see a movie, I check out new releases; I’ll pay the buck, but now, I’ll download. And Netflix is garbage for me, as I may watch one movie or ten in a month. And iTunes isn’t worth the cash.
Get a grip, folks. It’s important because small ripples turn into big waves when it comes to how the market fights piracy by reflecting that possibility in pricing and availability. Seriously, it’s Warner Brothers. Remember Napster? vs. Metallica? It’s a big deal now? That was WB, too, was it not?
I wouldn’t really blame Netflix, or any other streaming companies. I don’t think they have a choice.
But man, Warner Bros is incredibly stupid. Nothing like encouraging people to pirate movies.
Why will this increase piracy? It won’t. Not everyone who uses Netflix knows how to copy a movie. If I wanted a copy that desperate there is always someone who bought it I can borrow it from to copy it. So, I think the argument is pretty lame as otherwise every Netflix subscriber is a suspected criminal violating copyrights?!
That’s the beauty of Netflix – I do not need a copy of a DVD collecting dust. I update my queue and the movie is there again after a few days.
If Netflix and Redbox have enough volume, why not decline the deal and remove all WB movies. It will cost some subscribers in the short run, but in the long term WB will suffer with declines in sales.
I hate the idea that I will have to wait 28 days to rent because by that point people like radio/tv personalities and diehard movie geeks will have already ruined everything I want to see with an “accidental” spoiler.
Watching a new movie ASAP is important to me for just that reason… its not life or death or anything but it is nice to have seen the same movie everyone else is talking about.
For the record, I NEVER purchase DVD’s and no one is going to pay $20 for a 28 day jump on their $9 per month netflix account. If that is what Warner thinks, then their whole premise is a total failure.
Couldn’t I buy a new Time Warner DVD, and then rent it to a friend the next day? And then rent it to another friend? What give’s TW the power to deny Redbox or anyone else from renting it out?
If I bought a new snowblower from Sears yesterday and with all of this snow, you came over and asked if you could borrow it for $20, would Sears have the right to tell me I can’t rent it out until 28 days?
WTF? The DVD has (lame) DRM on it, so it’s not like anyone can copy it
Back in the day a VHS tape (or even a DVD) would cost $80+. Why not charge that outrageous price, and then drop the price 28 days later.
in your case… given your size… no one would give a damn…
go for it!
You mean just like how the RIAA only goes after big corporations? The MPAA would NEVER EVER go after one person riiiiight?
i defy you to find a case where the RIAA or any music linked entity came after a person for selling his music to another person…
if you’re going to compare.. please make it apples to apples…
thanks…
(selling your music to another.. and putting it up for anyone to download aren’t the same.. !!)