Originally posted by radagast83
Originally posted by ben4321
Not sure on the legal standing. I haven’t heard of anything similar. Did any independent movie companies ever try to get their movies removed from IMDB after Amazon purchased them?
You actually make a pretty good point with Amazon and IMDb.
Amazon produces dozens of programs. On top of producing, they also distribute dozens of programs and movies and have exclusive deals to distribute a number of older programs. Hypothetically they could manipulate all the ratings of their programs on IMDb, or manipulate their "competitors" ratings (i.e. any non-"Amazon Original").
Vote stuffing and massive trolling of programs are already pretty well established as having happened in the past on IMDb, but people still use it as one of the gold standards of movie sites, even with a hypothetical "conflict of interest" at play.
I get people’s concerns, but the overreaction is absurd in my opinion.
100% this
Fuck me, I hope this settles down soon. I’ll join UnTappd to get away from the drama. |
Originally posted by JK
Originally posted by dogfish120love
Dogfish chimed in on this
https://www.dogfish.com/blog/message-sam-current-ratebeer-changes
Sam makes some very valid points. I am in no way affilaited with Dogfish btw. It’s a dumb user name I picked a decade ago
What is valid point? Ratebeer is not journalism.
This. And there is no avenue in the law for Sam to force his request. |
Originally posted by DuffMan
Originally posted by radagast83
Originally posted by ben4321
Not sure on the legal standing. I haven’t heard of anything similar. Did any independent movie companies ever try to get their movies removed from IMDB after Amazon purchased them?
You actually make a pretty good point with Amazon and IMDb.
Amazon produces dozens of programs. On top of producing, they also distribute dozens of programs and movies and have exclusive deals to distribute a number of older programs. Hypothetically they could manipulate all the ratings of their programs on IMDb, or manipulate their "competitors" ratings (i.e. any non-"Amazon Original").
Vote stuffing and massive trolling of programs are already pretty well established as having happened in the past on IMDb, but people still use it as one of the gold standards of movie sites, even with a hypothetical "conflict of interest" at play.
I get people’s concerns, but the overreaction is absurd in my opinion.
100% this
Fuck me, I hope this settles down soon. I’ll join UnTappd to get away from the drama.
It will eventually. I think we should all be forgiven a few week bitch and moan period. |
|
|
Originally posted by TheHOFF43
I believe TheAlum and others gave proof in a private thread that joet was a part of but it was ignored.
Seems petty to attack a guy and call him (and others) a troll when they’ve given so much to you.
Lack of transparency is only a problem if you don’t trust what is behind the curtain. It is getting more and more obvious people don’t believe in the Wizard of RB.
Why did you have to bring me into this? |
Originally posted by puzzl
There is a surprising amount of apathy here from people who, for the past 8 months, have been misled into paying money to; directly contributing data to; and in the admins’ case, working for free for one of the world’s largest companies, and the single biggest threat to our hobby, our passion, or our livelihoods. A company who, if all went according to plan, could freely shut down Ratebeer due to disuse because they had wiped craft beer off the face of the planet. That is their end game here: not a proliferation of craft beer with their interests entrenched, but a global monopoly of a handful of their biggest brands for which no competition can exist.
Ratebeer is a now a means to that end, and craft beer hobbyists are now contributing to them to achieve that.
The sale is one thing, but to brazenly hide the share acquisition from paying members and contributing admins of the site for EIGHT MONTHS is completely foul. Anheuser Busch does not care about you, and neither does Joe T. There is no excuse for hiding it this long. To those feeling indifferent about this news, you’ve been had, and all I can say is: grow a pair.
This is spot on. |
Those not in the industry have to understand the continuous legislative assault that craft beer suffers from ABI. They invest far more in their legislative sabotage than they do marketing, and we all know how much Superbowl ads cost. Having fought these legislative battles first-hand from within a company, I can assure you that if ABI invested in Ratebeer, they did so because it progresses their agenda to kill the industry. How or when that happens is unknown, but I’m not willing to give them my money to destroy my brewery. |
Originally posted by thebaldwizard
Originally posted by TheHOFF43
I believe TheAlum and others gave proof in a private thread that joet was a part of but it was ignored.
Seems petty to attack a guy and call him (and others) a troll when they’ve given so much to you.
Lack of transparency is only a problem if you don’t trust what is behind the curtain. It is getting more and more obvious people don’t believe in the Wizard of RB.
Why did you have to bring me into this?
:-) |
|
|
Originally posted by radagast83
What DFH is doing would be like CBS asking for all their programming to be completely removed from IMDb, or some actor or actress requesting that their entire filmography be removed from the site.
That’s about as apple and oranges - or apples and freight trains as it gets. There is zero analogy between what AB is doing to the industry and what IMDb is doing. One is trying to crush everyone else while the other is helping to distribute and inform. HUGE difference! The majority of those who despise AB do not hate all big beer, it’s what AB does not who they are. My favorite brewery is considered big beer. It’s not about any changes AB might make to the site it’s that there is no financial gains to be had with a site that’s barely scraping buy and can’t afford even a part time coder, so why invest?
|
Originally posted by estover
Originally posted by radagast83
What DFH is doing would be like CBS asking for all their programming to be completely removed from IMDb, or some actor or actress requesting that their entire filmography be removed from the site.
That’s about as apple and oranges - or apples and freight trains as it gets. There is zero analogy between what AB is doing to the industry and what IMDb is doing. One is trying to crush everyone else while the other is helping to distribute and inform. HUGE difference! The majority of those who despise AB do not hate all big beer, it’s what AB does not who they are. My favorite brewery is considered big beer. It’s not about any changes AB might make to the site it’s that there is no financial gains to be had with a site that’s barely scraping buy and can’t afford even a part time coder, so why invest?
You answered your own question! Those are the exact reasons TO invest. They realize the potential that this site has and could especially have given professional resources. |
Originally posted by estover
Originally posted by radagast83
What DFH is doing would be like CBS asking for all their programming to be completely removed from IMDb, or some actor or actress requesting that their entire filmography be removed from the site.
That’s about as apple and oranges - or apples and freight trains as it gets. There is zero analogy between what AB is doing to the industry and what IMDb is doing. One is trying to crush everyone else while the other is helping to distribute and inform. HUGE difference! The majority of those who despise AB do not hate all big beer, it’s what AB does not who they are. My favorite brewery is considered big beer. It’s not about any changes AB might make to the site it’s that there is no financial gains to be had with a site that’s barely scraping buy and can’t afford even a part time coder, so why invest?
IMDb is a fully owned subsidiary of Amazon. Amazon is the fourth most valuable public company in the world, the largest internet company by revenue in the world and the ninth largest employer in the United States. They own their own film and television production company.
Sam’s point was not that AB crushes the little guy, but about ethics, conflicts of interest and apparently journalism because, in this case, there’s a conflict with someone who is in the industry controlling a website dedicated to reviewing that same industry. That’s apples to apples.
As for why they’re investing? Either it’s because AB has created a fake a venture capitalist subsidiary to (in bad faith) ruin the reputations of the businesses they invest in, or it’s because the subsidiary actually exists to, in their own words, act as a incubator, operator, and venture capital team. I love RB, but anyone who thinks it’s something more than a niche website right now is fooling themselves. There’s a lot of potential growth here to cover some of the ground that Untappd is lacking in, because really, Untappd is the beer industry gold standard when it comes to number of users and activity. Because of those two things, Untappd could probably be valued at the same price as some of the smaller social media tools out there. Investing in RB and creating an actually functioning and user-friendly app would go a long way in achieving those goals, all without actually compromising any integrity.
*Everyone* has access to the API, so the information that everyone thinks they’re paying for is already available for everyone’s consumption to access.
AB isn’t a great company, and has been part of a number of ethically questionable practices, but what you’re bringing here was not Sam’s point, not even if you try to read between the lines of text in his statement. |
