[Upd-discuss] software/intellectual property, portraits and hollywood

[Mashilamani Sambasivam]

Does anyone see a pattern in the following
three cases:

1. The software engineers at the bottom of 
pyramid sell their imagination/intellectual
property for peanuts and the people who
most benefit are their corporate bosses.
proof:
http://logo3dforkids.sphosting.com/slide1.html
(I also added proof that changing bank
reserves from 100% to 5% does NOT increase the
total amount of money in the economy).

2. A portrait by klimt goes for record price 
of 135 million dollars.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/5093650.stm
Is a portrait intellectual property?

3. hollywood inc. makes a million a minute
movies (eg:superman 3 for about 300million
dollars). Their motive is most PROBABLY NOT profit.
In my opinion/empirical observation, movies SEVERELY
dumbsdown imagination.

In all 3 cases it is about selling
IMAGINATION/INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and REAL BIG MONEY.

Does anyone else spot any pattern above?
Masi

--- Mashilamani Sambasivam <mashi3981@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> From Mashilamani Sambasivam Sat Jun  3 04:09:44 2006

> Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 04:09:44 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: [Upd-discuss] huh: Hollywood copes with
> digital age
> To: M Featherston <mlfeatherston@gmail.com>,
> Upd-discuss@lists.essential.org
> 
> My understanding of the BBC documentary and article
> is
> the following:
> * Hollywood studios has been getting 5% returns
> ***FOR
> YEARS***. It is not a recent phenomenon or
> something.
> * Ofcourse with the digital age its profits
> are eroding more and more.
> * But <quote>they can get more if they put the
> money in the bank </quote>. That is if they
> let their investment sleep in the bank, the
> studios will make more money.
> 
> What I was getting at is NOT that they have no
> way to reduce costs or increase profits
> in digital age.
> 
> What I was getting at is that there are 
> more motives to making 1 million per minute films
> than meets the eye. That is why they were willing
> to make less profits than they would if they
> let their money sleep in the bank.
> 
> This will become much more obvious in the future 
> fileswapping age if the studios' profits drop even
> more
> and they continue with same vigour.
> 
> Masi
> 
> 
> --- M Featherston <mlfeatherston@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > That's a good question. Movie studios obviously
> need
> > to make money,
> > just like any other business, but their chosen
> line
> > of business is
> > somewhat unique.
> > 
> > So, if 4 out of ten movies make money, everything
> is
> > ok for film
> > companies. In baseball, you are considered a
> > successful hitter if you
> > succeed 3 out of 10 times.
> > 
> > I think the movies makers, the old guard I mean,
> > will probably do
> > pretty much the same thing that they have done for
> > decades. I think
> > market forces beyond their control may eventually
> > change them, but it
> > is going to have to be something very dramatic.
> > Plus, it makes sense
> > that film producers look at other way to make
> money
> > off of films.
> > 
> > MLF
> > 
> > On 6/2/06, Mashilamani Sambasivam
> > <mashi3981@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On how hollywood is coping with filesharing:
> > >
> >
>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/5019472.stm
> > >
> > > Another interesting programme was:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/04_april/22/hollywoodinc.shtml
> > >
> > > Extracts from the programme:
> > > <quote>
> > > *A film costs tens to hundreds of millions of
> > dollars.
> > >
> > > *For a studio, as an investment, 6 out of 10
> films
> > > fail.
> > > *For a studio, as an investment, they get 5%
> > return.
> > > They can get more if they put the money in the
> > bank.
> > > </quote>
> > >
> > > what I am getting at is why do the studios put
> so
> > much
> > > effort (0.1 to 1 million dollars per minute of
> > film
> > > footage), time and money if the studios can get
> > much
> > > better return on investment elsewhere. The
> obvious
> > > is deeply influencing culture. But apart from
> > that,
> > > what is so important about movies?
> > >
> > > anyone have any thoughts on any of the above?
> > >
> > > Masi
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Upd-discuss mailing list
> > > Upd-discuss@lists.essential.org
> > >
> >
>
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Upd-discuss mailing list
> > Upd-discuss@lists.essential.org
> >
>
http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com