Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:02:44 -0500 To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com> Subject: [WSFA] Re: Nattering about the 'net.... [WSFA] Re: Different subjectnow,you have been warned! Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> At 11:08 AM 3/29/05 -0500, Michael Walsh wrote: >> omni at omniphile.com 3/29/2005 10:40:26 AM >>> >>Actually, until the internet went truly public, business use of the >>internet for advertising was prohibited and about the only business >I was thinking more about business-to-business email communication. There wasn't much of that until businesses got email...the only businesses on the internet prior to the early 90s were pretty much limited to government contractors (university professors working grants, defense contractors talking to the Air force or whatever). >After all, what possible reason would someone at some random company >need with usenet? Just a thought. The technical people used it to stay current with other technical people mostly. Management didn't have a lot of use for it. Not a lot of use by them of email either, as it was unlikely that whoever they needed to communicate with was on the internet at the time. Being the first guy with a phone was probably a very similar situation. FAXing was the more common way for management people to communicate quickly when voice wasn't desired. >As for advertising/commerical usage ofthe net - for the small business >it has been a miracle. Even though the sf buyers at B&N and Borders >have declined stock the latest Old Earth titles, I still have a darn >good shot of selling the books due to the net. Yep. But that has all happened in the last 10 years or so, since the general public got access. >Sometime ago I received an email about the Lensmen books I reprinted. >Turns out the person inquiring was in Japan. There goes territorial >rights restrictions. One hopes. There are still people trying to preserve that in the DVD arena for instance, with the "region encoding" idiocy. Unfortunately for them, there are DVD players that don't enforce those restrictions, and most computers that can play DVDs don't either. There are also places, lots in Asia, that make copies of DVDs without the restrictions and sell them cheaply...or over the net with "file sharing" systems. One recent response to this is the announcement by one of the big entertainment companies (can't recall which at the moment) that they will be selling legal DVDs much more cheaply in those areas...trying to price compete with the pirates. They won't be dropping *our* prices though... What's really funny is watching various legislators trying to pass restrictions on the internet (content restrictions, anti-SPAM laws, sales tax, etc.). They just haven't quite gotten their tiny brains around the fact that it's world-wide, and not geographically restricted to their area of authority. They can pass all the laws they like, but folks can just move their web site to an area outside of the jurisdiction and thumb their noses at them. For now anyway. I predict the formation of international bodies empowered by treaties with enforcement through economic sanctions and isolation of connections to the net to enforce some standards of behavior. Then censorship can reign again and governments can increase their powers still more. They will do this, of course, "for the children"... >The cash following into web retailers is signiificant enough that the >states with sales taxes desperately want their sales tax applied to >those sales. It may happen. I think they will have to await the formation of that international treaty setup. Until then they can only harass people with it. They are already getting revenue from internet business though. The folks running them "contribute" through payroll taxes, spending money locally in the states (and thus pumping up the local economy), and increasing shipping levels (fuel taxes and increased size of businesses like UPS, FedEx, etc.). States should just go to a VAT and give up on retail sales taxes if they want a bigger cut of the action. -- Mike B. -- What's worth doing is worth doing for money.