Wireless broadband

[Rik]

I suspect that part of their downloading habit will also be illegal material, which they won't see as theft either. It's the old 'victimless crime' syndrome.

[Dopamine]

There's the irony though Rik. One of the girls who uses an unsecured network also buys legitimate downloads from iTunes. It's that apparent confused way of thinking that I find so fascinating.

[Rik]

I know what you mean, morality seems to have become a very confused and grey area. Perhaps it reflects a confused an uncertain future for young people these days? 

[somanyholes]

i hope they are not using remote connections for checking their email/banking/accounts etc, in built up areas you can have a field day with people logging onto your lan thinking they are being clever using your bandwidth, when in fact you are sniffing their traffic, the last laugh being on them.

[Noreen]

There's the irony though Rik. One of the girls who uses an unsecured network also buys legitimate downloads from iTunes. It's that apparent confused way of thinking that I find so fascinating.

That really takes us back to my initial post doesn't it.

[Malc]

I know what you mean, morality seems to have become a very confused and grey area. Perhaps it reflects a confused an uncertain future for young people these days? 

Illegal downloading (not BB theft) is a very moral gray area, yes it is theft, but the record / film companies are stealing of us, why are we paying double the US?  Do two wrongs make a right, after all it's the record companies that started the ball rolling by stealing money from the public.

[talos2]

Victimless theft is usually regarded as theft from an organisation, MP3's, software, tax collectors etc,  wireless theft is from an individual who will have to pay for the connection I dont think the two should be confused.

[Rik]

They shouldn't, Bob, but I suspect they are. I doubt people who do this think of the implications.

[dlorde]

...the record / film companies are stealing of us, why are we paying double the US?  Do two wrongs make a right, after all it's the record companies that started the ball rolling by stealing money from the public.

Not sure I follow... How are they stealing from the public? They may charge more than we'd like, but that's not theft. If we don't buy their product do they still have a way to get our money somehow?

[Malc]

Music CD's, Exact same product costs £5 in USA but £9.79 here, same materials, same artist, same packaging. Also cheaper in Europe.

Why? Can't be transport, look at the size of America compare to here.

Or VAT 17.5% ( I think US is 8%). Which would make them 9.5% dearer.

So, how can they justify charging us double? We're being ripped off.

[Inactive]

Why? Can't be transport, look at the size of America compare to here.

Or VAT 17.5% ( I think US is 8%). Which would make them 9.5% dearer.

It varies from State to State Malc, some are as low as 6% I believe.

[dlorde]

So, how can they justify charging us double? We're being ripped off.

As I understand it, they are not obliged to justify it to the customer. They charge what they feel the market will take. I think they're making a mistake, but it's perfectly legal. I totally agree with you that the prices are often extortionate for the product supplied, but it's up to you if you want to buy it, and if nobody bought, they'd bring their prices down. There's no theft or stealing involved. I think it's quite important to distinguish between illegal activities and legal ones - whether you agree with them or not doesn't change their legality.

[Malc]

So, the way I see it, it's time the gvmnt brought in some laws to govern what companies charge us for products?

[Rik]

Probably couldn't be done, Malc.

[Malc]

Probably couldn't be done, Malc.

Or they don't want to cos they loose some VAT.

It's funny how they can regulate some things (energy, phones, council tax) but not others.

[Rik]

Council tax they can control to an extent, energy and phones they don't have any effective control on - in the latter case, the regulator has, if anything pushed up prices. It would be nice, though, if they spent as much energy enquiring of the music industry why it's pricing is so biased as they do in making noises about illegal downloads.

[Malc]

itunes UK .79p, USA .49p.

You log onto a US server and it redirects to a UK site.

How can the exact same thing cost over 50% more here? 

[Noreen]

At the accountancy firm where I used to work I once overheard a Partner explaining how prices to customers by retail firms was calculated. It eventually boiled down to "the price that the market will bear" in other words the top price that customers are willing to pay.

[Malc]

Sounds like we're soft and the Americans aren't then.

Now we know who the wise ones are 

[Noreen]

He was actually on the phone to a client who appeared to labour under the delusion that retail prices were something to do with the cost to the manufacturer plus a reasonable profit. He soon put them right.

[Rik]

The interesting question, to me, is why have we allowed ourselves to be exploited in this way. I suspect the 'island' mentality has something to do with it.

[Malc]

I think it's a lot to do with this gvmnt as well.

[Malc]

I suspect the 'island' mentality has something to do with it.

Way is it the Philippines is made up of 7107 islands, and things are miles cheaper than here, even in relation to wages.

[Rik]

Possibly because they didn't start with an Empire and considerable unearned wealth, Malc?

[Inactive]

Way is it the Philippines is made up of 7107 islands, and things are miles cheaper than here, even in relation to wages.

Except possibly rice Malc..