Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

Nice-to-have vs. Must-have

2014 - 11 - 14

How many of us are music fanatics, consider it life necessity and have to listen to something everyday?


絕大多數人,是不是音樂的重度使用者? 必須每天都聽,是生命的必需品?

你我可能都有過經驗,被這三家電信公司之一強迫半買半送KKBOX, myMusic或Omusic個把月、然後莫名其妙帳單又不小心多付了幾個月,才驀然想起把它給停掉。在你擁有$149月付費帳戶的那幾個月裡,你搞不好從頭到尾總共聽不到10次,每次還只聽3首曲子就關掉了。

這樣,就算這幾家大唱片公司說「我們以後不提供免費音樂、以後要全面改採付費制」了,你會買單嗎?

“An average user of free, ad-supported streaming services generates revenue of around $4 a year to record companies, according to one label executive…”
[1]

有家唱片公司的主管表示,廣告補貼制的串流音樂服務使用者,平均每年會貢獻給唱片公司美金4元的營收…

是啊,Spotify的付費用戶每年所繳的美金120元裡有70%給了版權人,就是$84左右。姑不論裡頭還得包括詞曲和公開傳輸費在內,這樣了不起也就是$4的21倍。以KKBOX而論,一群拼了老命專心只做音樂的網路資優生努力了10年,在台灣付費用戶大概頂多也就是600,000人的規模,那你是覺得台灣只有這幾隻小貓在聽音樂嗎?

重度使用者就是這麼些,你再榨看看會不會更多啊。有本事,乾脆連Vevo和YouTube的MV都別推,祝你能把nice-to-have變成must-have。

腦袋打結、想錢想到爆炸;好像沒有人能靠這樣致富。不信,我們賭一下好了。最後,看屈服的是唱片公司,還是網路使用者。

資料來源:
[1]Era of Free Digital Music Wanes (Wall Street Journal)
[2]此為各個串流音樂平台目前表現得簡單整理。圖引用自華爾街日報。
A look at music streaming service

Recommended article 

Crooked Construction Firms(Part 2)

追訴法律責任?大家別傻了。 一案建商,遠比消費者、比政府更精於算計,要比奸比賤,我們是贏不了的。 曾有律師投書向媒體表示:「像這種法律責任事沒有時效消滅的問題,就算公司結束了還是可以追究負責人。」 我們不這麼樂觀。 建案完銷,股東把賺的錢分一分,公司就辦停業或解散,你覺得董事長或總經理還會把錢留在身上、把財產放自己名下,等著將來自己起的樓被發現是海砂屋、或輕輕一震房子就倒時,供屆時賠償之用? 也許讀者認為可以用刑事責任逼他們展現誠意? 可預見的狀況是:賠償金十億,而這些不良建商負責人被法院以業務過失致死判二年,最後關個一年半就假釋在外。 或是開公司期間,這些建商的董事長和總經理,根本是每個月領三萬元車馬費的人頭? 那要不要再出個殺手鐧,立法禁止任何一個建商在房子蓋好後到住戶同意非因瑕疵而拆屋重建(例如都更)前,全部售屋所得均不得以股利或任何其他模式處分掉、更不准解散清算?(能想得出這種橋段的人肯定不知道憲法上的平等權和財產權保障是什麼意思) 故此,這幾十年來台灣建築業生態上常見的現象該如何解套,請見下篇「民刑事責任,對掃蕩瑕疵建案毫無幫助」。

The E-commerce Organised Crime

The Taiwanese authority recently cracked down a group of 5 people who allegedly sell imported Chinese counterfeits (luxury clothings, accessories, etc.) to over a thousand Taiwanese buyers on several e-commerce platforms in Taiwan. This isn’t something…

Glut in China's Housing Market

Murky Data Add to China’s Housing Headache Glut in China’s property market is worse than official data show, creating a drag on economic growth. …… China’s inventory of unsold homes is equal, on a square-foot basis,…