Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:42:40 +1200 From: Craig Harding <crh@outpost.co.nz> To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Junk Buster (was Re: cvs commit: ports/www/ijb - Imported source Message-ID: <m0yWU7F-0028ziC@acme.gen.nz> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980504000437.20104M-100000@sasami.jurai.net> References: <19980504050129.52485@follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm interested in this thread. I think, Eivind, where you're coming
from is that, as a developer of web-content, your business model is
based on the existing model of WWW interaction. People surf web,
people look at pages, people see ads on pages while they're looking
at other stuff, and the ads pay for the pages' creation and ongoing
upkeep.
The problem is, and why I think you're feeling so threatened, is that
this isn't necessarily the One True Business Model for the Net. It
may be the dominant model for commercial WWW sites at the moment, but
that's merely as a result of random circumstance. You have the right
to feel threatened, but I think your grounds for arguing a *moral*
right are very shaky indeed.
It's possibly that Net-related law could evolve to the point where
what you perceive as a right to have your pages displayed with all
ads intact becomes protected by the courts. But I'd consider this
sort of legislation a sad day indeed for the Net. Actual copyright
lawyers may argue differently, but I think such a legal argument
would be difficult to win with today.
Matthew N. Dodd wrote:
> If TV and Radio stations sold advertising the way you do nobody
> would advertise as the statement 'we -think- your add will be played
> 5 times a day but aren't quite sure.' would be highly offensive to
> the people buying advertising space from you.
Actually, the way TV & radio stations sell advertising is a lot less
deterministic than counting ad hits on web pages. It's way, way, way
less scientific and the media advertising industry only works through
a vast consensual hallucination - the radio or TV station state that
their survey figures actually mean something, and the ad agencies and
advertisers choose to believe that the TV & radio stations say. For
example, TV stations will tell you that people actually do watch TV
commercials, yet when university marketing departments do actual
consumer research they find that when ad breaks come on, people go to
the toilet, make a coffee, surf channels, mute the sound, have a
conversation, make a snack, read a newspaper, almost anything but
actually watch the commercial. And yet no-one believes the university
researchers, because they can't afford to. A multi-billion dollar
global industry would be under threat if the Emperor really was
wearing no clothes.
You're seeing exactly the same thing in Eivind's arguments. The WWW
community can't afford to believe that there is an alternative model,
or everybody goes out of business overnight. Hence it becomes a moral
issue.
-- C
"we'll be right back, after this message from
our sponsor"
--
Craig Harding Head of Postproduction, Outpost Digital Media Ltd
"I don't know about God, I just think we're handmade" - Polly
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0yWU7F-0028ziC>