[M4IF Discuss] Article in Salon.com

[Damien Cave]

rob, i honestly don't think that salon's readers -- a pretty 
sophisticated bunch -- would be confused by this. i laid the 
groundwork simply at the start, then added the layers of complexity 
later. anyone who read the whole story will understand how the system 
works.
and the point is just as you put it: "the consumer always pays."
best,
damien cave
senior writer
salon.com
415 645-9274
At 5:59 PM -0800 3/8/02, Rob Koenen wrote:
>Kevin,
>
>Of course. In the end the consumer always pays for all the
>cost of providing a service, including the profit that any
>party stands to make. And yes, there are more users of
>MPEG-4 than just the end-users (or consumers).
>
>It is important, however, to dispel the myth (and some people really
>believe this) that the licensors or there representatives will collect
>royalties directly from end-users. This was very much the
>gist of the story Stop-Pay-Download.
>
>It is good to be concerned, but people should be aware of
>the real situation and then be concerned on the basis of
>that understanding, and not on the basis of myths and FUD.
>
>Thanks for your input,
>
>Rob
>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Kevin Marks [mailto:kmarks   apple.com]
>>  Sent: Friday, March 08, 2024 17:53
>>  To: Rob Koenen
>>  Cc: Damien Cave (E-mail); M4IF Discussion List (E-mail)
>>  Subject: Re: [M4IF Discuss] Article in Salon.com
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Thursday, March 7, 2002, at 02:53 PM, Rob Koenen wrote:
>>  > "a 2 cents an hour charge that either users or manufacturers
>>  >  of the software would have to come up with. "
>>  >   User will _not_ be charged under the proposed scheme.
>>
>>  Rob, that is sophistry.
>>  The current scheme charges content vendors when revenue is being
>>  generated. This means someone is being charged for it. Either the
>>  viewers (directly or indirectly) or the content vendors.
>>  Either of these
>>  can reasonably be termed 'users' of MPEG4.
>>

--