[KLUG Advocacy] Re: And the Spam Wars continue...

Bruce Smith advocacy@kalamazoolinux.org
18 Nov 2002 21:31:20 -0500


Just when I had my hopes up that you'd let this tread drop ...  :-(

> >>>>The Britsh do this, and have since the 1920's. They collect a license fee
> >>>>for operating a RECEIVER...
> >>>That's nice, but it's different here, and we are here.
> >>...Do you beleive this is a better model, or not as good? Why?
> >I don't have enough facts to form an opinion.
> OK, that's fine.
> 
> >Do they get commercial free TV for the fee?
> Yes, the BBC has several channels with entertainment, news, movies, etc.
> There are also competitors, commercial channels, but this is a fairly
> new phenomena (maybe 20 years or so), and seems to be working out fairly
> well. This competitve pressure has often caused the BBC to try new things,
> since they're not the only game in town, especially if that town is fairly
> big, like London, Conventy, etc. Outside producers also buy bandwidth from
> the BBC and do their own thing; CNN International in HQ'ed in London, and
> has recently become available all over the UK.

Slight change of subject, but how do they enforce the fee if the signals
are broadcast over the airwaves?  Do they just charge a fee to every
person, no matter if they own a TV or not?  Otherwise, how would they
know who has working TV's and who doesn't?  (the honor system? :)

> >>>>>But what happens when the next release of Mozilla/Netscape/IE/Opera/...
> >>>>We have two conflicting commercial interests here; perhaps they need to 
> >>>>get together and discuss things....
> >I doubt the commercial browsers will.  They'll accept payoffs instead.
> Payoffs? In what form? By who? To serve what ends?
> Are you suggesting that Proctor and Gamble (for example) would compensate
> Microsoft (for example) to NOT block their ads, while everything else (save
> other takers) is blocked?

I'm saying that the advertisers will band together and "convince"
browser developers NOT to put blocking software in their browser.

"Convincing" could be lobbing it into law, or perhaps "explaining" how
it would destroy the internet if it happened.  Perhaps paying M$ a nice
fee just for listening to their side of the argument.  In any case, they
have the resources to make it happen.

> >I wouldn't put it past Mozilla ...
> The point is that I wouldn't put it past any of them, since the end users have
> generally expressed opposition to some of the methods used to promote products
> on the net. Any player who does this best and first may gain share among end
> users, which is thought of as a universal goal.

Since Mozilla is open source, they are not as driven by money as much as
corporations.  Some rebel some where will make a patch . . .

--------------------------------------------
Bruce Smith                bruce@armintl.com
System Administrator / Network Administrator
Armstrong International, Inc.
Three Rivers, Michigan  49093  USA
http://www.armstrong-intl.com/
--------------------------------------------