MrBerre's Rants 'n Raves

Wat natuurlijk ook bepaald niet meehielp, was het feit dat de partijen díe eens netjes om een licentie gingen vragen, werden weggelachen bij de contentindustrie. Dat internet werd misschien over twintig jaar eens wat, maar we gaan eerst DVD en daarna Blu-Ray als distributiemedium inzetten en daarna bellen we wel. En als je liet zien dat je systeem gewoon populair was, dan was je een piraat en dan moest je kapot.

Internet besloot daarom dat de contentindustrie dom was, en zoals dat gaat bij techneuten worden domme mensen gewoon gepasseerd. Vervolgens ontstond een jarenlange wedloop tussen contentindustrielobbyisten die met rechtszaken probeerden die diensten uit de lucht te krijgen, en internetslimmeriken die in die vonnissen net zo snel weer gaten schoten. Oh, dus je mag geen centrale server hebben waar je content op zet. Ok, dan doe ik het decentraal met alleen een coördinatieserver. Mag dat ook niet? Dan decentraliseer ik ook de coördinatie en dan zet iemand anders wel een site op met de toegangscodes. Enzovoorts.

A year later, when Obama stated that the 1967 borders should be the starting point for renewed two-state negotiations — an American position for more than a generation — Netanyahu delivered what Beinart describes as “one of the most extraordinary humiliations of a president by a foreign leader in American history.” Fresh from speaking at AIPAC’s annual conference, Netanyahu replied that there was no chance of Israel withdrawing to “indefensible lines.” Then Netanyahu went before a joint session of Congress. Each member of Congress had a single gallery pass to give out, and most gave theirs to their largest AIPAC donor. With the hall packed with supporters, Netanyahu received one thundering ovation after another. Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who as head of the Democratic National Committee plays a key role in party fundraising, used arm motions to signal to her colleagues when to stand and applaud, and they rose and clapped at Netanyahu’s most controversial statements.

Shawn Ryan, creator of The Shield and involved in many other TV-series, wrote a couple of interesting tweets in the past couple of hours:

To answer many of you: I want as many people to watch my sows as possible & I do wish studios would make them easily accessible worldwide.

— Shawn Ryan (@ShawnRyanTV) January 21, 2012

To answer many of you: I want as many people to watch my sows as possible & I do wish studios would make them easily accessible worldwide.

@ShawnRyanTV Isn't part of the responsibility for making that happen on you as an artist? Joe SixPack isn't going to make the studios change

— The Mighty OCD (@MightyOCD) January 21, 2012

@ShawnRyanTV Isn't part of the responsibility for making that happen on you as an artist? Joe SixPack isn't going to make the studios change

I am trying. MT @MightyOCD: Isn't part responsibility 4 making that happen on you as artist? Joe SixPack isn't going to make studios change

— Shawn Ryan (@ShawnRyanTV) January 21, 2012

I am trying. MT @MightyOCD: Isn't part responsibility 4 making that happen on you as artist? Joe SixPack isn't going to make studios change

@ShawnRyanTV : My biggest gripe about content providers is the DRM. I WANT to give you my money, but there's always something in the way.

— Charlie Szymanski (@MrMetlHed) January 21, 2012

@ShawnRyanTV : My biggest gripe about content providers is the DRM. I WANT to give you my money, but there's always something in the way.

@ShawnRyanTV : (be it copy protection software so I can't rip to my PC, or lame activation schemes for video games. It's just a mess.)

— Charlie Szymanski (@MrMetlHed) January 21, 2012

@ShawnRyanTV : (be it copy protection software so I can't rip to my PC, or lame activation schemes for video games. It's just a mess.)

Hear ya. RT @MrMetlHed: biggest gripe about content providers is DRM. I WANT to give you my money, but there's always something in the way.

— Shawn Ryan (@ShawnRyanTV) January 21, 2012

Hear ya. RT @MrMetlHed: biggest gripe about content providers is DRM. I WANT to give you my money, but there's always something in the way.

@ShawnRyanTV : Also, finally, here's an example of a company that went DRM free and THRIVES: gog.com/en/news/gog_co…, wish big media would try.

— Charlie Szymanski (@MrMetlHed) January 21, 2012

@ShawnRyanTV : Also, finally, here's an example of a company that went DRM free and THRIVES: http://www.gog.com/en/news/gog_com_joins_opposition_to_sopa_and_pipa , wish big media would try.

But I'm a bit surprised by these two tweets:

Worry that we're raising a generation who expect this content for free, w/no restrictions/commercials. Will lead to fewer, cheaper shows.

— Shawn Ryan (@ShawnRyanTV) January 21, 2012

Worry that we're raising a generation who expect this content for free, w/no restrictions/commercials. Will lead to fewer, cheaper shows.

I was able to profit nicely before piracy became serious issue. Conditions arising that might make next Shield hard to make. Crews suffer 2.

— Shawn Ryan (@ShawnRyanTV) January 21, 2012

I was able to profit nicely before piracy became serious issue. Conditions arising that might make next Shield hard to make. Crews suffer 2.

Shawn Ryan is one of the good guys: I recall buying the DVD set of the first season of The Shield and being astonished by the volume of extras (multiple commentary tracks, deleted scenes, featurettes,...), yet the set was less expensive than comparable ones. But one of the reasons I bought it was because I'd heard many good things about the show, yet it wasn't being shown on TV in Belgium. (And once it did get shown, it was relegated to impossible hours.)

But that is an untenable expense. Sure, you can do that for series you care about, but not all of them are as budget-friendly as The Shield's set was. Sure, you could wait a while for the sets to become cheaper, but that means that you have to wait even longer. And there's no certainty that a series will get released on DVD/Blu-ray in the first place. Or that it will end up "untouched", i.e. with all the original music in place.

Piracy of TV shows has been going on for more than a decade. In that time the companies involved seem to have learned little to remedy this, except spending money on lobbyists, bribing politicians, and suing (potential) customers. Sure, there's Hulu and Netflix, but from what I gather neither is that great -- and in any case, they're not available worldwide.

I do notice that some shows cross the ocean faster, something deemed impossible years ago. In the UK, HBO shows are now shown on Sky Atlantic mere hours after they've premiered in the US. Some Belgian channels were recently mere weeks behind for shows like The Mentalist. The first season of Homeland was broadcast on Nederland 3 shortly after it was finished in the US. What used to be years is now reduced to months or even weeks.

Of course, that still isn't close to what any serious fan wants: he/she wants to see the latest episode now, mere hours after broadcast. And I bet many would be happy to pay for this, if the price was right. And no, that isn't €5 for an episode, which is the price the likes of Telenet were asking for "fresh imports from the USA". That's an absurd amount.

I'd happily pay €10 per month for a subscription to a service that would allow me to access just about anything I'd like, mere hours after it was broadcast in the US. I'd even pay more if the offer was in HD (720p) and if there were subtitles (I'm fine with English ones). But most importantly, it has to contain just about anything. So not a few select series, but also late night talkshows (like The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson). In fact, I'd want to be able to access at least everything that's broadcast on the major networks (ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox/The CW). Perhaps an extra €5 would also give you access to what's available on cable broadcasters like TNT, AMC, Syfy, ABC Family, Starz, FX,... Access to the content of HBO and Showtime would be an additional €5.

Let's not forget that there are also shows on UK broadcasters like ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5,... and their digital sister channels that might be of interest to us. Or other European broadcasters. Or Canadian. Or Australian. Etcetera.

I can imagine the objections: €10/€15/€20/... is too little for that. You might be right, but can I point out that it's still more than the entertainment industry would be earning previously? Shouldn't that be one of the lessons from the heinous MegaUpload takedown: that people are willing to pay for entertainment, or more specifically, for fast delivery of entertainment in a format of their liking?

Vanavond werd -- voor de tweede maal nota bene -- Kraftwerk uit dat lijstje gesmeten, ditmaal door Robert ten Brink, een onbenullige Nederlandse televisiepresentator die in zijn meer dan dertigjarige carriere geen seconde televisie heeft voortgebracht die het verdient om bewaard te blijven. Maar meneer houdt niet van "computer-muziek" (ik durf te wedden dat hij dat zelfs niet als muziek beschouwd), en dus verving hij Kraftwerk door... The Beach Boys.

Eerlijk is eerlijk, ik gun The Beach Boys een plaats in een dergelijke lijst, ze zijn tenslotte verantwoordelijk voor enkele kleine meesterwerkjes -- "Good Vibrations" en "God Only Knows" bijvoorbeeld. Maar als er slechts 17 plaatsen zijn (toegegeven, een arbitrair getal -- het is simpelweg hetzelfde aantal als er er in de oorspronkelijke Apple-commercial zaten), dan moeten er harde keuzes gemaakt worden. En dan verdient Kraftwerk die plaats. Want zij zijn de peetvaders van de electronische muziek.

Stacey Rookhuizen (qui?) wilde Elvis Presley in de (sowieso al veel te witte) lijst en denomineerde godbetert Public Enemy, want "ze waren niet de eersten". Nee, dat klopt, dat zijn The Last Poets. Maar hoe belangrijk ze ook zijn, het zijn nobele onbekenden. Er moet een rap-act in die lijst, een artiest die voldoet aan de criteria zoals die geformuleerd zijn in die Apple-commercial:

Here's to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently.
They're not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.
Because they change things.
They push the human race forward.
And while some may see them as the crazy ones,
We see genius.
Because the people who are crazy enough to think
they can change the world,
Are the ones who do.

Overigens: wat doet Michael Jackson in die lijst? En waarom Prince en niet Sly And The Family Stone?

Ben Rayner of the Toronto Star had the opportunity to do an email interview with Prince — I'm guessing the Welcome 2 Canada Tour isn't selling that well, hence the publicity.

So what do we learn? Well, that Prince is still clueless (his replies are all uppercase). And that he lies. (Neither of those are revelations, by the way.)

I've read in a couple of places that you and the band rehearsed something like 300 songs for this tour. Is that media hyperbole or are you cats really that pathological when it comes to preparedness?

30 YEARS IN THE BUSINESS GIVES U A LOT 2 WORK WITH.

Yes it does. Yet somehow most of his tours of the past 15 years contain the same 15 or so songs. Even his recent European tour, which contained far more diverse material than any of his recent tours, only had about a hundred different songs, a quarter of those being covers (!) and plenty of those songs only showing up once or twice.

DOING A RESIDENCY IN ANY PARTICULAR CITY REQUIRES A LARGE REPERTOIRE TO ENSURE REPEAT BUSINESS. MOST OF THE AUDIENCE HAVE BEEN 2 MULTIPLE SHOWS IN THEIR LIFETIME. IT IS TRULY A BLESSING.

Yet this wasn't the case for the "21 Nights" shows in The Forum in Los Angeles, where shows were far more alike.

Speaking of, what can we expect from the set list on these dates? And how do you decide what goes in or out of the mix on a nightly basis when you're working with a catalogue that deep?

EACH AUDIENCE IS DIFFERENT. WHAT THEY RESPOND 2 MOST FAVORABLY USUALLY DICTATES THE FLOW OF THE CONCERT AND THE CHOICE OF THE MATERIAL.

This is utter nonsense. Prince's setlist are prepared in advance, and most of the nights the show that is performed is exactly what's on the paper, although a song might be dropped or another might be inserted.

ALSO THE SOUND QUALITY AND THE ENERGY OF THE BAND. U CAN ALWAYS TELL WHEN THE GROOVE IS WORKING OR NOT.

Hence his audience now getting interminable "jams" instead of actual songs.

THIS BAND IS WAY 2 TALENTED NOT 2 B RECORDED. THEY R A BAD INFLUENCE. :-)

Dear Prince, you haven't managed to put out a decent CD if 15+ years. Which indicates that your quality control isn't exactly trustworthy.

WE R VERY INTERESTED IN THE WAY NEW WORKS WERE DISTRIBUTED B4 THE ADVENT OF RECORDED MUSIC. WHEN U R IN THE MUSICAL DRIVERS SEAT, IT AFFORDS U A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. THE OPTIONS R ENDLESS.

<facepalm> Dude, just admit you don't have a clue.

We sat back down at the table and the main officer started explaining what was going to happen next: They weren't going to arrest me, they were going to confiscate my computer and my porn temporarily to examine it all, and they would get back to me about what their findings were in two days. He also then started to lecture me about how horrible child porn is and how people spend their lives in prison or get killed because of it. At this point the most ridiculous thing that ever happened in my life happened right there at the kitchen table. I glanced at the other officers at the table with us and noticed they were already going through my folders and writing down the titles I had written on the CDs in their notebooks. I think my brain was in goofy, half-tired, relief for not being arrested mode because suddenly I just burst out laughing right as the main officer was telling me how bad pedophiles are treated in the prison system.

I can't explain it. I couldn't stop laughing. Everyone in the house just stopped and stared at me. The officer got really mad and asked "What's so funny, Mr. ______?! I don't think this is a laughing matter at all." Still chuckling, I stammered out several apologies and tried to explain to them how funny that particular moment was. "I'm sure you've figured out by my porn collection that I'm gay, right?" The two officers making the title notes just nodded. "You probably don't know what a bear is? It's a big, heavy-set man and he's usually much older. That's what I like and that's what all of my porn is. That's about as far from kids as you can get!" The officer said "I still don't see what's funny." so I apologized again and again and just said something like "You just raided my house for kiddie porn and now I'm sitting at my kitchen table with armed men who are looking through my huge collection of gay bear porn at 7 in the morning. I think my brain just couldn't take it." The two officers at the other end cracked up. Then the rest of the officers in the house and my roommate started laughing. Finally the main officer cracked a smile and said something about it still being a serious charge and repeated everything that would happen next.

Back in 2004 The Daily Show with Jon Stewart showed how craven "he said/she said" journalism is:

Jon Stewart: Here's what puzzles me most, Rob. John Kerry's record in Vietnam is pretty much right there in the official records of the US military, and haven't been disputed for 35 years?

Rob Corddry: That's right, Jon, and that's certainly the spin you'll be hearing coming from the Kerry campaign over the next few days.

Stewart: Th-that's not a spin thing, that's a fact. That's established.

Corddry: Exactly, Jon, and that established, incontrovertible fact is one side of the story.

Stewart: But that should be -- isn't that the end of the story? I mean, you've seen the records, haven't you? What's your opinion?

Corddry: I'm sorry, my *opinion*? No, I don't have 'o-pin-i-ons'. I'm a reporter, Jon, and my job is to spend half the time repeating what one side says, and half the time repeating the other. Little thing called 'objectivity' -- might wanna look it up some day.

Stewart: Doesn't objectivity mean objectively weighing the evidence, and calling out what's credible and what isn't?

Corddry: Whoa-ho! Well, well, well -- sounds like someone wants the media to act as a filter! [high-pitched, effeminate] 'Ooh, this allegation is spurious! Upon investigation this claim lacks any basis in reality! Mmm, mmm, mmm.' Listen buddy: not my job to stand between the people talking to me and the people listening to me.

It's one of the many kinds of phony journalism that Jay Rosen (professor of journalism at New York University) is always battling. In that particular case, the target of that criticism then misinterpreted the actual critique (deliberately?).

Jo Caudron's publieke bekentenis kreeg een klein beetje linkliefde van Belgische twitterati. Ik ben het grotendeels eens met zijn betoog, en nieuw zijn zijn klachten ook niet (ik zeg diezelfde dingen al zowat een decennium) en toch gebeurt er niks. In de VS heb je dan wel Hulu en Netflix, maar zaligmakend zijn die diensten nu ook weer niet.

Ondertussen evolueert de technologie voortdurend, maar Telenet en Belgacom (en andere spelers) geraken niet verder dan voorspelbare en vaak amateuristische "innovaties", terwijl hun basis-aanbod allesbehalve op punt staat. Het is schrikbarend hoe vaak de EPG van Telenet voor geen meter klopt — en dan heb ik het niet over een programma dat vijf minuten later begint, maar over het compleet ontbreken van programma-informatie voor bijvoorbeeld BBC Three of BBC Four, of de schijnbare onmogelijkheid om hun TV-gids aan te passen aan ingelaste uitzendingen (een extra nieuwsuitzending, bijvoorbeeld).

Oh kijk, je kan nu op je iPad live kijken naar een (beperkt) aantal zenders. Voorlopig nog gratis, maar dat kan veranderen. En de verbruikte bandbreedte telt mee in je Telemeter. En daarvan moet ik onder de indruk zijn? Om nog maar te zwijgen van het feit dat Yelo enkel op Apple-toestellen werkt, en niet op andere tablet-computers — ook al was dat beloofd bij de lancering, ondertussen bijna een jaar geleden.

De productiemaatschappijen en de TV-zenders zullen niet blij zijn met wat Jo Caudron te zeggen heeft, maar dat is hun eigen schuld. Want waar blijft hun alternatief? Of verwachten ze nu echt dat iedereen maar blijft wachten tot een zender in onze contreien een serie aankoopt en uitzendt, ook al is dat pas maanden of jaren later? Telenet heeft Prime Series, maar als ik kijk naar wat er daar vandaag (zondag 18 september 2011) te zien is, is dat maar triestig. Game of Thrones biivoorbeeld zit aan aflevering 3, die in de VS meer dan vier maanden geleden vertoond werd.

En waarom zijn er vandaag een half dozijn films te zien op een zender die Prime Series heet? Kunnen die niet vertoond worden op Prime Star, Prime Star-1, Prime Action, Prime Family of Prime Fezztival?

Als ik bijna €20 per maand zou betalen voor een zender die gespecialiseerd is in tv-series (want die filmkanalen interesseren me nauwelijks), dan wil ik series 24/7. En in HD bovendien. En met VOD in HD. En up to date: gisteren in de VS, vandaag op Prime Series — en dan bedoel ik eigenlijk: vanmorgen (onze tijd) in de VS, vanavond hier. Onmogelijk zal Telenet beweren, want niet genoeg tijd voor de ondertitelaar. Ik behoef geen ondertitels, alhoewel ik geen nee zou zeggen tegen Engelse ondertitels in DVB-formaat — dus geen "ingebrande" ondertitels, maar ondertitels die ik kan selecteren via een knop op mijn afstandsbediening.

Maar zelfs dan nog is het maar de vraag al wat ik wil zien, hier ook zal aangeboden worden. Want welke zender zou geld steken in de aankoop van programma's zoals:

• The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,
• The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson,
• Real Time with Bill Maher,
• The Green Room with Paul Provenza,
• Penn & Teller: Bullshit!,
• of This American Life.

Of klassiekers zoals The Larry Sanders Show of Duckman? Zeker als je bedenkt dat SBS er niet in slaagt om reeksen als The Good Wife of The Vampire Diaries op het scherm te houden, maar wel de zoveelste herhaling van The Closer.

Maar het zal blijven bij dromen. Want we hebben het over een industrie die nog steeds de wereld verdeeld in regio's, en het mij zo onmogelijk maakt om Deadwood op Blu-ray te bekijken.

Het is 1987, twintig jaar na de release van Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, "[which is] widely regarded as one of the greatest [albums] of all time, and has since been recognised as one of the most important albums in the history of popular music". Ik ben zestien, en zit op het middelbaar.

Wat ik me herinner, is dat radio en TV uitgebreid aandacht besteden aan die verjaardag, en bij uitbreiding aan het hele tijdperk waartoe deze LP behoort. Hippies! Flower power! Free love! Kortom: de jaren '60 (van de vorige eeuw), en dan vooral de omwentelingen die in de tweede helft daarvan plaatsvonden. Zelfs op school, en (in zoverre mijn geheugen correct is) niet enkel in de muzieklessen van meester Vansichen.

Het hielp natuurlijk dat de plaat begon met een handige lyric: "It was twenty years ago today / Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play". De eerste helft daarvan werd gebruikt als titel van een documentaire die ook in deze contreien op TV te zien is geweest — alvast op de Nederlandse, en ik ben vrij zeker dat zelfs de toenmalige BRT hier plaats voor had gevonden in haar programmatie.

Het zijn herinneringen die opborrelden toen ik las wat de Super Deluxe Edition van Nevermind zal bevatten, en zag dat Spin een hele editie aan de plaat gewijd heeft.

Want wat mij bijstaat, is hoe "oud" ik de muziek van de Beatles vond in 1987. Dat was de muziek van mijn ouders (de "Rode" en de "Blauwe" van de Beatles zat in hun platencollectie), en die stond mijlenver af van "mijn" muziek. Tussen Sgt. Pepper's en 1987 ligt een oceaan aan nieuwe muzikale stijlen, om nog maar te zwijgen van de technische innovaties. Bovendien waren de uitvoerders dood (Lennon), grotendeels vergeten (Harrison, Starr), of erger nog een grap (McCartney, die ik vooral kende van nummers zoals "Ebony and Ivory", "Mull of Kintyre", "Wonderful Christmastime", "Pipes of Peace" of "We All Stand Together"). Je kan dezelfde labels plakken op zowat alle jaren '60 artiesten die je ziet in de "It Was Twenty Years Ago Today"-reportage (in de context van 1987).

Waar ik dan naar luisterde in 1987? Massa's popmuziek, en daar reken ik ook deze platen bij: "Bring the Noise" van Public Enemy, "Jack Your Body" van Steve "Silk" Hurley, "Love Removal Machine" van The Cult, "Strangelove" van Depeche Mode, "I'm Bad" van LL Cool J, "Indians" van Anthrax, "Sign O' The Times" van Prince, "Just Like Heaven" van The Cure, "Animal" van Def Leppard, "Rent" van Pet Shop Boys, "Paid in Full" van Eric B. & Rakim, "The One I Love" van R.E.M., "Welcome to the Jungle" van Guns N' Roses, "Girlfriend in a Coma" van The Smiths, en vele anderen. Veel muziek die voor gefrontste wenkbrauwen zorgde bij mijn ouders.

Ter vergelijking: zowat de grootste groep dit jaar op Pukkelpop was... Foo Fighters. Met als frontman de drummer van Nirvana. Andere bands op het festival waren bijvoorbeeld The Offspring, Skunk Anansie, Deftones, Blonde Redhead, Sebadoh en Suicidal Tendencies, namen die je pak 'm beet 10 à 15 jaar eerder ook al op de affiche stonden. The Pixies touren nu al jaren met muziek die ze bijna een kwarteeuw geleden hebben opgenomen, in zalen die vele malen groter zijn dan indertijd. Dance acts zoals Underworld, The Prodigy en Chemical Brothers draaien ook al meer dan anderhalf decennium mee en zijn grote namen in een genre dat ooit sneller vernieuwde dan zijn eigen schaduw.

Heeft dit een pointe? Niet echt. Het is gewoon een observatie die recent in mij opkwam. Maar ik heb nu wel zin om een zestienjarige bij zijn/haar lurven te grijpen, hem/haar dit verhaal voor te leggen en te vragen: hoe ervaar jij dat?