Piracy Is A Cultural Opportunity; Embrace It
from the sharing-is-fun dept
Piracy has become a force of nature in the entertainment world. No matter what you make or how you release it, there are pirates waiting around the corner to try to get it for free. No matter what you try to stop this from happening, you just can't -- much like a storm, you have no control over its movements and power. All that is left is to embrace it and hope to harness the storm's power for your own benefit.This is what Daniel Cook from Spry Fox has decided is best. In a reprint of his comments at Gamasutra, Daniel explains that piracy is a fun activity that can be harnessed for good.
Being a 'pirate' was being part of a community. You and your friends shared games like social gaming gifts on Facebook. It didn't cost you anything to copy a game and give it to someone. A game was a social token to chat about, a gesture of kindness to reciprocate. A key takeaway from that time is that copying and sharing vast quantities of digital goods is a deeply fun, social and highly useful activity. This is a new thing, a new behavior in a post-scarcity world.This is perhaps the most commonly ignored or overlooked aspect of piracy by those who want to end it. For many people, sharing games, movies and music is a fun activity that allows them to share what they love with their friends. Despite what those who seek to stop piracy think, there is very little animosity involved in the activity. It is this love of sharing that can be, as Daniel puts it, hacked for the benefit of the creator.
With shareware, we hacked the copying behavior. People would play the random floppies and some of clever programs would say "Hey! Did you know that you can pay for this?" And a small portion of users did. 'Pirate' and 'consumer' are not mutually exclusive properties. In our capitalist society, almost everyone (with a few notable exceptions) is trained to buy stuff. People who like checking out new software for free are really just another audience of potential consumers.It was just recently that Ubisoft learned a similar lesson. That the percentage of people who pay for single purchase games is about the same as those that pay in free to play games. If you want people to pay for games, one of the best ways to get them to do so is to let them experience the game first and for free. By giving fans the ability to share the games with others who may not have heard about it on their own, you can expand the pool of potential paying customers.
Unfortunately, there are many creators and gatekeepers out there that want to vilify such behavior. They can't fathom that someone is playing, listening, reading, watching their work without paying for it. They see no benefit in it. This mindset has dangerous outcomes for their paying customers.
It has been a really confusing time for businesses. Some lashed out by labeling consumers as evil, some tried to protect the old ways with DRM. Relationships with customers...who see themselves as just having fun sharing cool stuff...became antagonistic. 30 years. When you raise kids in a warzone, they grow up parroting propaganda. No wonder the conversation is polarized.It is actions like adding DRM, anti-piracy ads and threatening fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars that will end up costing the entertainment industry more in the long run. As those in the industry seek to threaten and lash out at paying customers, many of those customers will begin to lash out as well. They will end up doing exactly what the industry wants to stop, pirate. For many purchasers of games, it often starts by downloading cracks for games in order to remove restrictive DRM. But there is a lot that can be done to turn the tide.
Detach yourself from the emotions of history. Give up the past forms of what games were. Adapt to the current environment with one eye firmly fixed upon the future.There are opportunities out there that many creators have found and are enjoying. It can be things like adding a "Cockroach Edition" to your payment options. It can be adding pirate hats to all your characters and putting the game on the Pirate Bay. It could be giving players the ability to set their own price. It could be anything really. By embracing the sharing culture of your fans, you can expand you fan base and increase the potential to make a living.
People copying digital goods as an inherently joyful social activity is an opportunity. It is an artistic opportunity. It is a business opportunity. It is a cultural opportunity.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: culture, opportunity, piracy
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
You pirate a game, it's buggy as shit. (fallout 3 for example). But you love the game. So you go ahead and buy it, thinking that the bugs are from a bad crack.
You begin playing your 60 dollar love child and discover the gamebreaking bugs weren't from the crack, it just shipped broken.
Guess who doesn't give that company any more money?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
...and I STILL had to use the cracked executables!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
just do this, replacing the [] with the angle brackets used in html: [a href=http://gnu.org]this?[/a]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Marketing isn't just getting money from customers.
I insist on paying Baen for books I get free, because they've always treated me as a friend to their enterprise. I'm glad, proud and happy go give them my money, and I go out of my way to make sure they get it.
These days I don't go to movie theaters, rarely buy DVDs, and rarely buy eBooks unless I *know* I'll like them. I'm NOT happy giving my money to people who use the word customer and thief interchangeably.
Guess which group will win out in the long run?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Marketing isn't just getting money from customers.
telephone service sucks, can't talk to people at the company...
internet service sucks, and the isp doesn't care...
service at the restaurant sucks, and they don't care...
get fucked over by EVERY company you give money to for crap they won't fix...
WHY is it we're supposed to be happy-joy-joy konsumers again ? ? ?
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Marketing isn't just getting money from customers.
& the banks suck, steal your money, screw you over. They don't care.
It's cause they've gotten used to being the 'bigshots' everyone depends on, they know even if they treat their customers like shit and screw them over every chance they get they won't suffer any repercussions for it. People will just grumble to themselves and carry on with the screwing.
Everyone figures they don't have a choice, screwing or go without, maybe that's a big part of the problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Marketing isn't just getting money from customers.
Walmart pretends to pay them, they pretend to work.
Rather simple really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's something the industries will never do when it comes to money. Especially since they think piracy will put them out of business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Piracy isn't a solution, it isn't really a chance. It's an abuse, and more over it's self defeating in the long run, removing the cash flow required to keep most content and software industries running.
Short term, it looks good... but in the long run, well...
check back in about 10 years. You won't like the results if we keep going down this road.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The content corporations are still addicted to the one-way conversation they used to have with us. Now anybody can create, publish, distribute, make commentary on, adapt, and remix works. This is a hard fact of what technology enables us to do. It also enables us to bypass the legacy channels of content distribution that no longer serve the demand of the public and people other than the legacy players are meeting that demand.
It matters very little that they violate a legal right granted by legislative powers. What matters is that technology renders those rights inert and that change can't be reversed, only redirected. There will never be a market like that which was in the heyday of the content industry, the party's over and they're going to have to reform their model if they mean to remain relevant to a culture that is accustomed to having instant access to content they want, the way they want it, for a price that suits them. The businesses that suckled at the teat of copyright will have to stop modeling their business to suit their own desires and start modeling it to suit their customers'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I say yes, come back in 10 years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's been shown that those that are willing, and able to adapt to the changing market are absolutely thriving.
Those that refuse to adapt on the other hand, and who then blame everyone but themselves for the resulting problems... not so much, and good riddance.
Bonus points for the 'kool-aid shower' line by the way, hadn't heard it used that way before, and a little creativity from you lot is to be commended, even if it is just a repackaging of one of the standard attempts at insult.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You do know, of course, that piracy has been around much longer than ten years? About thirty for sofware piracy; and about twenty for music and movies.
Guess what? It's still growing after all this time. Decades of legally and morally discouraging piracy simply haven't worked.
You know what has? Treating "pirates" as potential customers, and convincing them to pay money. It's how Steam made over a billion dollars per year in the last few years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
More to the point: Guess what? More software has been created in the "piracy" years than ever before. More music has been created in the past ten years than ever before. Movies have been pretty constant (as far as I can tell), but the profits from movies have only been increasing.
The anti-piracy crew likes to pretend that piracy actually results in the production of fewer movies, albums, or games. There is not one single shred of evidence that supports their position.
In ten years, after piracy is even more the norm than it is now, we'll have even more movies, music, and computer programs.
I'm willing to bet a year's salary on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Wow, let me get out my debunking boots, it's going to get messy.
"More" is a very subjective thing. Software has always been increasing, because the amount of computers and devices has continued to increase. Piracy or no, the amount of software produced has gone up. Income? Not always so good. In fact, the current race to the bottom to compete with piracy (with 99 cent apps, free apps with ads, nagware) seem to be gutting things pretty solidly.
Music? More is being created because there are more tool, but often what passed for music is remixes and such. Not exactly productive life, is it? The time between major artist releases is generally getting longer, as they spend more time on the road making a living and less time making new music for the mooches.
Movies? Box office dollars have been pretty consistent, but actual ticket sales are down. The numbers are propped up only by the extra charge (slowly disappearing) for 3D movies and Imax presentations. The number of releases has gone up, the time in theaters has dropped, and the income per movie as a result is generally dropping, which is never a good sign.
"The anti-piracy crew likes to pretend that piracy actually results in the production of fewer movies, albums, or games. There is not one single shred of evidence that supports their position."
Actually, if you want a good lesson in what is to come, you are best to look at early internet adopters and early piracy victims to see what happens: Porn.
Simply, the internet for a short period of time increased the size and scope of the porn industry, making sales where none existed, with a landrush of companies moving online. Today, 15 years after that land rush started, the porn industry is decimated by piracy, with almost every single major studio and production company either closed out, sold, or consolidated into one of a few ownership groups (the biggest is a company out of Canada called Manwin, who run much of what's online, including Playboy's websites).
The number of productions, which initially spiked with the internet, has dropped to nearly nothing. Most pornstar girls actually make their money these days as escorts, using their occasional porn movies as marketing for their escort careers.
Now, ask around, and there is plenty of amateur porn, stuff people shoot of themselves on their iphones, sexting, and such. If you include that stuff as production, the things are constant. As an industry, as a business, it has been all but wiped out.
So pretending that piracy doesn't have effects is just ignorant. You just haven't seen the music and movie industries go through the full cycle yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You STUPID MORON!
It failed because, you know...
The internet is for porn!
That stuff's out there, forever, online.
And it's NOT just real life stuff.
EVERY fetish
EVERY kink
EVERYTHING you can IMAGINE is online somewhere!
So, of COURSE the porn industry is going down...
Why?
Because there's MORE OPTIONS out there.
Gah...
I can BUY international porn from Japan for less than 10 dollars and it'll keep me entertained for months on end.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You don't get it: Internet porn is dying too, a victim of piracy and it's own self consuming nature. Basically, porn is now a commodity used to lure people to try to sell them other stuff, because they aren't paying for porn anymore. Porn production the world over is way down including in Japan - because there isn't any money left in it for them.
Looking at the material produced when there was money, and thinking that applies in the future just doesn't make sense. You enjoy today what was produced yesterday, but tomorrow, you get less because none was produced today.
Step back and think about it, and think about the implications. Porn was a business with plenty of margin to absorb this, and that margin is all gone. Movies and TV and music don't have those sorts of margins. What happened to porn is what is currently happening to music and will certainly happen to movies and to ebooks and everything else... until there is no money left in any of it.
I know it's hard to imagine, because you 20 somethings haven't lived those a whole cycle yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Gimme a break, fool. While I do watch the odd bit of porn, the death of the professional porn industry wouldn't really be missed by 99% of the world's population.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
(For second thing, the porn industry mostly focuses on men's tastes, what little they've got for women really isn't my thing)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You don't like remixes I take it?
Of course. When you have these industries that depend on exclusivity and deciding what others get to survive, and suddenly something that allows people to choose what -they- want comes along, the limited one goes first.
It's like evolution, if the world heats up the first ones to die are going to be all of the arctic, boreal and tundric animals. On the other hand, the numbers and variety of heat adapted creatures will explode.
Piracy is cultural evolution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think that remixes are, for the most part, a lazy regurgitation of past success that makes movie sequels look downright inspired. It's the modern equivilent of a K-tel compilation album.
"When you have these industries that depend on exclusivity and deciding what others get to survive, and suddenly something that allows people to choose what -they- want comes along, the limited one goes first."
They don't depend on exclusivity - they depend on people respecting their rights as creators and performers to sell their products and services for a fair price.
"Piracy is cultural evolution."
Piracy is the absence of respect for the works of others. Perhaps it is the ultimate expression of the idiotic snitches get stitches mentality that pervades western culture. Whatever it is, it's not productive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What you gonna do when all the ice melts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You just described 80% of culture that's created today and 95% of what the biggest studios create.
Everything is a remix.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Everything is a remix."
Yup, and you accurately have noted that most of current culture is, well, a regurgitation, not an original.
We aren't moving forward. We are at best doing very noisy and very smokey donuts in the high school parking lot of life. Amusing to watch, perhaps, but certainly not a golden age like it could be.
When everything is a remix, it means there is very little new. Don't you find that incredibly boring?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
They don't.
What they inspire is Mexican Hat Dancing around copyrighted content, or Simon Says with the copyright holders.
It's the same amount of regurgitation without copyrights, except you've got the additional bonus of being obligated to play two preschool level games to make your content legal! Of course, the holders can regurgitate as much as they want! Monopolized regurgitation!
Isn't it awesome ??? =)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, it's pretty simple - if you cannot reuse someone else's stuff (again), perhaps you will be inspired instead to write your own. Rather than just reaching for an off the shelf solution (or off the web, ripping someone else off) you actually take the time and write your own screenplay, or write your own book, or actually write and (eek!) perform your own new song.
Hollywood? Yeah... that's why we get movies like Avatar, Big, When Harry Met Sally, The Game, Star Wars, and even toon movies like Cars and Toy Story. We get all those because Hollywood only regurgitates. Yeah right. Sorry, your strawman fails. Yes, they do reuse things, yes, they do make sequels, but they also make plenty of new stuff that people come to love.
Most of current culture is regurgitation... NOT ALL OF IT. Can you see in anything other than 白黒?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually, no.
You know the saying "We stand on the backs of giants"?
Everything that has happened, everything that will happen, is inspired by stuff that's happened before.
Culture, society, etc, is built from what comes before it, and the tighter that is controlled by a select few, the worse culture and society gets.
However, if those few people didn't have so much control over culture and society, we would be allowed to grow even more than before.
Remember this...
The Fantastic 4 that Marvel has?
It was a BLATANT attempt to copy the Justice Society of America comics.
In FACT! Stan Lee's boss walked in one day and said "DC has this Justice Society comic out, make one just like it."
And THAT is how culture thrives and continues.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You win kinky sex!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nobody is standing on the backs of giants with a remix, they are sucking at the teat of simplistic duplication and derivative living.
"Remember this...
The Fantastic 4 that Marvel has?
It was a BLATANT attempt to copy the Justice Society of America comics.
In FACT! Stan Lee's boss walked in one day and said "DC has this Justice Society comic out, make one just like it."
And THAT is how culture thrives and continues."
Now pay attention to your own story. In a "remix" culture, he would have just bought a copy of the comic, changes a few words in the talk balloons, and called it a "remix". See? That's not advancing anything.
Instead, they were INSPIRED by the other one, they were lead to a new area and they developed their own twist, their own variation, they own characters, their own content, drew their own comic, and so on.
They didn't remix the content - they riffed on an idea.
If you cannot understand the difference, I pity the day when you get to university and hand in your first 95% borrowed remixed paper. Then you will get a rude awakening!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nowhere did I say "remix" in there.
So, right there, you failed.
BTW, I'm already out of university, so, do try again.
Also, I HAVE handed in those 95% "remixed" papers you claim, and I still got passing grades.
"Instead, they were INSPIRED by the other one, they were lead to a new area and they developed their own twist, their own variation, they own characters, their own content, drew their own comic, and so on."
Yes, but, BUT!
In YOUR world, DC should have sued marvel out of existence for DARING to use the idea of Justice Society for a new comic.
You didn't read my post at all, because, as I said "everything that has happened, everything that will happen, is inspired by stuff that's happened before.
Culture, society, etc, is built from what comes before it, and the tighter that is controlled by a select few, the worse culture and society gets.
However, if those few people didn't have so much control over culture and society, we would be allowed to grow even more than before."
Entire new genres can happen by "remixing" anyway...
You know hip hop? That's all remixing there, and it's an entirely different genre from other forms of music, now isn't it?
Get off the damn soap box.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Aesop?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here's a little secret for you:
'New' is subjective and/or relative.
'Original' is also subjective and/or relative.
Almost everything to a young child is new, but to someone who is older, chances are they've seen it billion times.
I don't personally think there is, or ever was, new or original. Are most things boring for me? Yes, actually. But if you really REALLY like something it won't matter if it's new or original.
I keep getting pepperoni pizza, it's the same damn topping everytime, never gets old for me though, cause that's what I like. But that doesn't mean I like every pepperoni pizza.
Remixes are exactly the same. Just cause they re-use the same content doesn't make them all the same or boring, there's a vast spectrum of remix types, qualities and styles. Just like pizza.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
App developers aren't competing with piracy, they're competing with all the other 99c apps on the market. If you do a search for a generic term like "shoot birds" you will get over 1000 results. How would a company like Rovio rise to the top of the casual gamers market if they start out their app at $20. Whilst many of those apps at 0-99c would be inferior, they would be fulfilling another measurable unit in peoples list of necessities... and that's 'time'.
A while ago I downloaded Mass Effect Infiltrator for 99c on sale. I haven't played in once. Why? because I currently tend to whip out my mobile for gaming only when I have a 5 minute break and I just want to continue on something casual with the sound off. I don't know when I'll play ME - if I ever will - because they stupidly haven't released it for my tablet yet (and they are lucky because I tend to avoid purchasing games entirely when they ignore the Asus Transformer).
Another competitor is 'trend-setting'. When Android was first released on phones, free/1.99 Angry Birds was the gaming standard in terms of price and graphics - the thing you had to beat in order to be a success. The latecomers like EA and Gameloft can't price their apps too high because with a choice of 1000s of slightly inferior titles versus a high priced one is just not enough of a pull. I'll purchase Dead Space for $6 but if they were asking for $30, well an alternative like Dark Area 3 will do me fine - after all it's my TIME as well as money.
3rd, they're competing with space. My first Android phone had just 200mb memory! 200mb - these days that's enough for all 4 Angry Birds titles and a couple of other budget games. In fact, I'm coming up against that problem now with my 16gb Transformer - I can't fit anymore games on it so I'm less likely to spend even on titles I really want to play.
So you think they'd make MORE money by staying in the studio and signing over the rights to their new songs to a big company who's going to spend it all on the RIAA? Did you even do the research before commenting here? Go on, google and find out how most artists make their money - I'll give you a clue - it doesn't happen by recording.
Since I was a little boy I've noticed ticket prices at the cinema have risen consistently - along with condiments to point where the price of a cinema trip for 2 is almost the same price as what you'd pay at a chain restaurant.
But you know what else has increased - or should I say been introduced - since my childhood? Mobile phones and TV adverts before the main picture. So before I used to sit through 10-20 minutes of trailers for new films - which I always enjoyed anyway - now I've got to sit an extra 30 minutes through adverts I can see at home anytime! And when the main picture finally does start, how many times am I going to be distracted by a small bright shiny light or a ringtone?
That's not to mention the noisy gang of kids on the back row giggling through fairly serious or intense scenes because the producers just had to lower their age rating to get more punters and more spent on tickets.
I once sat in a cinema where someone lit up a cigarette! I didn't complain because I didn't want to miss something on screen but you can bet if they'd taken a picture on the iPhone the staff would be there! Funny thing is, someone with a camera on a tripod at the back wouldn't really effect my viewing pleasure - the noise, the mobile phones, the price and the occasional smoking does.
Since TV's have gotten pretty large and much cheaper over the years I guess that's why I, and everyone like me, is staying at home and waiting for DVD release or just downloading movies - and no - I NEVER watch cammed movies because they are such poor quality!
Speaking of staying at home to watch TV - have you noticed how large budgets have gotten for TV shows now? high production values, huge continuous story arcs... Ask yourself why so many Hollywood actors are now jumping ship from movies to TV?
So... which is it? Piracy, or the democratisation of publishing something that EVERYONE does? Which btw has no trademark, copyright or patent (which is a good thing because the human race would probably be wiped out in 2 generations - well unless everyone turned to pirate sex. Aaarrr!).
So pretending piracy is the reason for decline in certain industries when those industries are only facing what all industries face when technology advances (ice sellers vs refridgerators, horse & carts vs the automobile, film (photography) manufacturers vs digital cameras, I could go on), is just ignorant.
So Big Media may disappear, so what? Really, so what? Music, film, the arts.. they existed before Big Media, before copyright, they will exist after. Not in the form we are used to now, but when has any practice stayed in it's exact form from inception? Should cars be made to be pulled by horses?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
As far as I can see you care nothing about what is actually produced - only whether it forms part of the monetary economy.
You are wasting your time here - because none of us cares about that - because in the final analysis it doesn't matter a jot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
More to the point: Guess what? More software has been created in the "piracy" years than ever before. More music has been created in the past ten years than ever before. Movies have been pretty constant (as far as I can tell), but the profits from movies have only been increasing.
The anti-piracy crew likes to pretend that piracy actually results in the production of fewer movies, albums, or games. There is not one single shred of evidence that supports their position.
In ten years, after piracy is even more the norm than it is now, we'll have even more movies, music, and computer programs.
I'm willing to bet a year's salary on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Even more to the point, the software industry started at a time when software was not even (thought to be) copyrightable. Piracy only started when s/w was officially put on the list of copyrightable works - so the software industry has grown up under two regimes - the no-copyright regime and the piracy regime. There was never a time when s/w copyright existed and was broadly observed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The new philosophy for creating media seems to be one of love and peace with consumers, as if Jesus himself invented it. Though online file sharing may look shady on paper, it becomes infinitely worse when you draw attention to it by overreacting, which is what many big content industries have done. If they had only left well-enough alone, none of this would be happening now. Thanks to their berserking though, I think the future will belong not to those who control the consumer, but those who love the consumer and share that love with everyone they know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Some pirates only do so because they can't afford the product. This does not impact sales while still allowing more people to become fans of your work.
Some piracy is the RESULT of a sale already made(for example customer buys game only to find absurd computer breaking DRM) sales are also not impacted here because you were already paid for the product you sell
Some pirates are just cheapskates and you shouldn't bother trying to stop them from pirating because they simply don't pay for uneeeded things. I've actually bought things on reccomendations from one such pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
This would be me due to my interest in obscure works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The "whys" of piracy are often the justifications for avoiding payment - I can't get it NOW, I can't get it with Swedish subtitles NOW, I can't get it cheap enough to pay for NOW, I don't like the options to buy NOW, and so on.
New movies, offered up online for $1 at the day of theatrical release would still be heavily pirated - and probably pirated off of those $1 copies. Price won't change much, pirates will be pirates.
You can justify it up the wazoo all you like, it comes down to the same thing: They will not pay for the product, no matter what - but they want it and will consume it.
Something has to change there, and if your remove the "making some money from it" you remove the ability to pay to make it. What you get for free today is because enough people are actually still paying for it. But that number continues to slide, leaving you with fewer and fewer people paying to entertain the masses.
"I've actually bought things on reccomendations from one such pirate"
Soon enough, you will learn to just ask him for a copy, and solve your problem altogether.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I love how you just assume that those are just "justifications" You don't care if "piracy" really equals lost slaes. You're just an "us vs them" drone rooting for your team.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, I agree. Everything would still be pirated...but if you put up movies for $1 on the same day as theatrical release, you create a new revenue stream. If I leave the theatre, and find that for $1 I could get a 1080p MKV file of that movie, with multiple subtitles and no DRM...I would pay (more often than not). I'm not the only one.
Yes, you would still have those who infringe, but you can at least attempt to create sales.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Sure some A**hole will steal some, that person is not going to go away. But if they are like me and I was looking for your work, I'll pay. I have the stupid DVD collection to prove I'm a sucker.
Holding things back by region or some other silly reason/mechanism just ignores the fact that some pirate will make it available. I'd much rather buy the version you provide when I want it. If I have a choice between the copy you made that is known to be awesome and a pirate copy, which may be a crappy cam or encoded badly, I will pay for the one you offer. Every damn time.
So there you have it. I do want your version. And I want to pay for it. But seriously, you going to make me wait 6 months to a year? Bah. Somethi..Squirrel!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You have that completely backwards. People can get it NOW, they can get it with Swedish subtitles NOW, they can get it cheap enough to pay for NOW; they just can't get it that way from the people who created it. That sounds like a market opportunity.
"They will not pay for the product, no matter what - but they want it and will consume it."
You have described one group of people, and they are obviously not worth spending any time or money on fighting. That's literally pissing money down the toilet. Concentrate on those who are happy to spend. Doing anything else is just stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Or to avoid DRM which punishes PAYING costumers.
In that case, to NOT pay is the SMART option. I had to find a copy of the game without the malware, it just so -happened- to be free. They could've made the payed version without it and I would've bought it, but they didn't. Their loss.
Or because the actual product is way overpriced for what you're actually getting (900$ fucking dollars for a comic book no I wasn't making this up, it was no longer in print, and there was NO E-Book version of it anywhere except on torrents)
In that case, to NOT pay is also the SMART option. They could've avoided it if they scanned in it and made it available in an E-Book format, but they didn't. So the physical copies became obscenely priced. The E-Book/scanned version just so -happened- to free. They could've made it infinitely available at a sane price, but they didn't. Their loss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's not a black & white situation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ditch the stupid puritanical nonsense.
You need to get over your sense of entitlement. You need to get over your your artistic megalomania. You need to concentrate on what gets you paid rather than antagonizing those of us that might pay.
Ditch the "crime and punishment" mentality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ditch the stupid puritanical nonsense.
Wait. So the freetards who refuse to pay for anything even if it's a reasonable price aren't the entitled ones...but the creator who offers their product for a good price and wishes to have their rights respected is the entitled one?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ditch the stupid puritanical nonsense.
* fans decide what is good, not you. And its existence on pirate sites may not be sufficient evidence of quality.
** the market decides what is reasonable, not you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I realise most techdirt critics here are just trolls and deserve to get flagged but this one is actually trying to make a point instead of just ad hom.
Even though I agree his point is BS I can't help but feel it's an abuse of flagging to use it like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Fucking Touchscreen...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's like the old saying goes "he who fights ad hom trolls must be careful not to become an ad hom troll."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Though to be fair, it's probably just tuned reflexes to instantly hit "flag" on anything negative since negative posts are almost always also trolling posts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
i'm still not sure if i give them more or less attention this way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Isn't that what they said back in 1992?
Look at where we are now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Kool-aid shower. I'm pirating that one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
-Gabe Newel of Valve Softwear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flagged Comments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Flagged Comments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Similar breakdown
Formula to making money as an Artist on the Net.
The formula to profit on the net is this:
1) More access to content = more fans
2) More fans = more true fans
3) More true fans = more money
Daniel Cook article is beautiful. We ALL owe him one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Similar breakdown
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Similar breakdown
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Similar breakdown
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Similar breakdown
Mike Masnick has a bachelor's degree in Industrial and Labor Relations and an MBA, both from Cornell University.
Heave away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Similar breakdown
I thought this was common knowledge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FTFY
2. More fans create more core fans
3. ???
4. Profit!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mm hmm. "Let's just throw some shit together with half ass costumer service cause we know those dumbasses will buy it" syndrome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No memory quite as special as your first booty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rape Is A Reproductive Opportunity; Embrace It
Theft Is A Repurchasing Opportunity; Embrace It
Techdirt Is A Humor Opportunity; Embrace It
Basically, you can make anything bad sound good, if you frame it right. It's especially easy if you aren't the victim, but instead the benefactor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You, him, and everyone else here have the right of free speech on this site. You do not have the right to consequence free speech, and if someone says something that out of bounds/offensive, then the comment will suffer the consequences and end up reported.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's really too bad, but perhaps another one of those "monotone" things about Techdirt that Mike so dearly loves. Can I get an amen from the choir?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You compared piracy to rape...
PIRACY - hurts no one
RAPE - forcibly having sexual intercourse with someone
HOW THE HELL ARE THEY EVEN COMPARABLE?!
It's like comparing Apples (piracy) to a firecracker (rape).
You have NO FUCKING GROUND to stand on!
I hate people like you who take things so far out of context that nothing can come of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Citation needed. I would put that piracy hurts anyone who was trying to sell a product, which is now obtained for free - see 58% decline in recorded music sales since the arrival of Napster.
How do you back up this claim? (oh, and links to Techdirt don't count... I don't want opinion, I would like some facts).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Lets have a look at your "facts".
- " .... 58% decline in recorded music sales since the arrival of Napster."
I believe that in this case the term "recorded music sales" refers to sales of label music only and therefore the "fact" can only be somewhat true and is mostly false because it is misleading due to a lack of qualifications and/or statement of assumptions.
The implication that the entire 58% is solely due to Napster is ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Only if you go by record sales, which, no one will deny are down...
BUT!
Here's the thing...
Music sales, as a WHOLE are up!
http://www.mdoeff.com/blog/category/itunes/
That's from 2003 to 2007, but, you'll notice, if you scroll down...
that, when iTunes first started, they had 1 million sales.
At the end of that, they had 3000 million sales.
In 4 years.
Wow, looks like 58% decline to me, doesn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
58% INCLUDES digital.
Increases in digital sales didn't offset the huge loses in traditional media sales.
learn to read before you go off on stuff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Apparently the person is capable of reading and has done so as evidenced by posting here, no?
"Increases in digital sales didn't offset the huge loses in traditional media sales"
I'm not convinced this addresses the point being made by the post in question, for example what about the total sales are up item? Perhaps someone is not being completely honest here. How does that saying go ... figures do not lie but liars figure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But we do have colledge courses on how to write good techdirt comments.
And you can take them for just $456,876,124,144,987!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Big Lie.
Piracy is COPYING without permission.
It's not theft.
It's not rape.
It's not armed robbery on the high seas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sounds like you are quoting the GOP platform.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem....
The only way there is going to be change is when these demigods are routed out and removed from the positions they hold, where they are removed from there positions as gatekeepers by the customers and the artists, nothing else will get rid of them, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel, things are changing at such a fast pace it looks like any day something could happen that changes the whole entertainment industry.Just imagine waking up one morning to see headlines of hundreds of thousands of artists cancelling there contracts or releasing content under different names in a free and sane way, where they can make money and feel that there fans don't hate giving it to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem....
looks that ways to me..
how many artists do you know that were FORCED to sign contracts, and did so against their will and desire ?
you must has lists of thousands of them by now, and why have they all not cancelled their contracts again ??
why are those thousands of ripped off artists flooding the pages of Techdirt ??
could it be you are wrong !!!! ????
or could it be that as you have no part in the industry at all, (apart from your leaching duties), you have no bone in this fight.. nothing to lose,
what is certain is that you yourself have clearly have never produced anything of worth, or have any concept of what a contract is !! LOL..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The problem....
But accusing people of being rapists and crack dealers is 'producing something of worth', right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The problem....
If there is such a gi-hug-ic opposition to Techdirt...
Why haven't any of your sleeping giant artist friends posted? It's been MONTHS! They can't be hibernating that long, now, can they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The problem....
What is certain is that you are clearly incorrect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I thought I was just a thief and a rapist. When did I start dealing crack?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You so silly - you are guilty as soon as you are accused.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sure piracy will not go away, but that is no reason to accept it any more than society accepts murder, nor should y ou try to make excuses for their (your) actions..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Copyright infringement DOESN'T. Every single time we are told how harmful it is by copyright maximilists, their numbers just don't add up. Whereas time and time again, I have infringed on copyright and then, as a direct result of that infringement, paid.
One of the main reasons we here at Techdirt call you a stupid troll is you are constantly equating Murder+Theft+Rape with Copyright Infringement. They are completely different concepts, and crimes. For one thing, M+T+R are dealt with under criminal law, while copyright infringement is civil law. There is no point to equate them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
all your doing is being a appoligist for criminals.. we know where your morals are..
i also like how you call it 'infringment' sounds so much cleaner than THEFT, as is its correct term..
and your quaint distinction between civil and criminal law, do you even know the difference ???
it's still a crime if it is civil, it is only a crime not against the state.. but I cannot expect you to understand that.. you'be been drinking the pirate mikes rantings..
and after all, he's a self admitted Google shill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
yes.
Criminal law requires juries and generally has to have a 100% conviction of all 9 juror (that is, no reasonable doubt of the crime) to be convicted.
civil law? When you're on trial, you don't need 100% conviction among all 9 jurors, just 51% of the jurors need to find you guilty to make you pay fines.
"and after all, he's a self admitted Google shill."
No...
The correct title was "APPARENTLY I'm a Google shill and didn't even know it".
Quit taking it out of context.
Oh wait, you won't, your stupidity is on par with Glen Beck and the rest of Fox News.
"i also like how you call it 'infringment' sounds so much cleaner than THEFT, as is its correct term.."
Theft - the loss of goods
infringement - no loss of goods
GET IT?
"copyright THEFT is a theft without a victim"
If that's the case, then WHY is it theft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
'Cause the MAFIAA said so, duuh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
What ancient moral code bans copying?
The Bible?
English Common Law?
The code of Hammurabi?
You might have some luck with that last one because it is long and convoluted and tended to punish the poor and favor the rich.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
It's in Reverlations !!!!
first serious copywright warning..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to them, may God add to him the plagues which are written in this book.
22:19 If anyone TAKES AWAY FROM TEH WORDS OF TEH BOOK OF THIS PROPHECY, may God THAKE AWAY HIS PART FROM THE TREE OF LIFE, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
And really, trying to mix Christianity in this mess? If you hadn't already figured it out, Jesus was a fish and bread pirate. More specifically, he was a third-party distributor, probably guilty of incitement to infringe.
You're an embarrassment to the faith.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My thoughts
Three thoughts:
- It all depends on what kind of world you want. If you appreciate a law of the jungle mentality, you will have a certain value system. If you are a connoisseur and have the means to support your appreciation of hard work-supported quality you will want another. My guess is that there is far, far more of the former than the latter, especially in this medium. And the population at large accept it for lack of a comparison.
- in general, people are lazy, greedy, and stupid, though not necessarily evil. It has just been culturally accepted everywhere. Lazy - People will do as little as possible to achieve as little as they can get away with - all aspects of work and play. They don't see any problem with this. Greedy - People want raises but give no evidence of having gained any extra value - is someone with 20 years of experience more valuable than 15 - doubt it. Stupid - they are willing to undertake a task with little knowledge of how to do it, no understanding of the big picture, and no appreciation of those who would help or teach them how to do it.
- art in all its forms is not a viable career and has limited value to the important issues affecting the world and its improvement. It is a hobby and pastime - one that we should all be given enough time off work (real) to do and freely distribute. The ideal system is where everyone gets a technical education - blue or white collar and produces works of art on the side, performance, visual, aural, etc. More art in the world, but more of a long tail of quality -- but with widespread sharing and support, i would bet that people produce the type of art they want, not what production houses demand, and eventually larger bodies of really insightful and inspiring work is created. Better for everyone.
And these issues are why so many people pirate, have a poor work ethic, do not appreciate nor understand quality, rebel and 'occupy' for no good reason, feel disenfranchised, etc. Of course, don't tell the artists any of these reasons for they will rebel out of spite rather than the traditional non-causes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: My thoughts
In general you're a pompous ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: My thoughts
And so have confirmed my hypothesis: lazy, greedy, stupid, but not necessarily evil -and in all likelihood will totally be swept away by progress. Shame, really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: My thoughts
Even though the pigs can occasionally pop their heads above the muck, they choose to stay in their sties. I suppose all the complaining and recycled non-answers at least give something to talk about round the cooler, rather than pursuing thoughtful real change. Hint: the whole system is broken and its not the labels, government, and judiciary - its the public. At least there is that truism: the people really get the government and 'system' they deserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
"If you have two coats and you see someone without one, give them one of yours."
"Give Caesar's things (money) to Caesar (government) and God's things to God."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Proof that you are making stuff up is not an "excuse".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
My point (that you missed) is that you are also not able to stop murder, rape and stupidity, you missed that, or simply did not understand the argument..
that is, why dont we use his same plan with murder, rape and so on, after all there is no way to stop it..
You see how if you start with a stupid, non-logical argument, like the authors then your argument fails before it even gets going..
only a moron would think like that, if you cant stop a form of crime, support it !!!!!.. FFS..
here is his quote, so you want have to re-read the whole thing..
"No matter what you try to stop this from happening, you just can't -- much like a storm, you have no control over its movements and power. All that is left is to embrace it and hope to harness the storm's power for your own benefit.
ALL THAT IS LEFT IS TO EMBRACE IT !!!!!!..
yea, right, so embrace same sex weddings as well then !!!!.. you're not going to stop it, so embrace it ..
see how the auther created a scraw man argument, !!!
Clear, that is a lie, im sure there is more things you can do but embrace it, only a fuckwit would think like that..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Your stupidity hurts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ignoring key details. Imagine that?
The cost of prosecuting robbery and rape is accepted. It has been for thousands of years. Killing a perpetrator or destroying their life has been considered acceptable for just as long.
No society has ever agreed to that steep social cost with regards to copying.
We don't execute people for speeding or jaywalking. We don't put so much effort into preventing them either.
Society at large just doesn't value that.
You're trying to conflate copying with murder when the pervasive historical and even contemporary tendency is to treat it more like jaywalking (if a crime at all).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignoring key details. Imagine that?
throught history knowledge and the theft of IP (knowledge) has been consided a crime, and knowledge itself is accepted as a product of great value. That you have a RIGHT to protect..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ignoring key details. Imagine that?
historically, those laws have only been around for a short period of time.
200 years vs 6000+ years of civilization (as far as most people know), you have to ask yourself, why is IP laws so important?
Remember this, when a law goes to benefit only a few people (that is, far less than 50% of the population), those laws become ignored by the general populace.
Why is this?
Oh, it's because those same laws that people are ignoring are hurting the public.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again...
Stupid laws get ignored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ignoring key details. Imagine that?
as clearly they do exist, and you know it, so are you denying reality here ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ignoring key details. Imagine that?
It appears that the one in denial is you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Piracy can leave a copyright holder in exactly the same situation as before the work was pirated. The same cannot be said for murder.
Piracy does not deprive a copyright holder of their possesions and can lead to new oppertunity for the artists. Theft only ever deprives
Porn? I can't fap to piracy so....point to you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
but you cannot say that is true !!, nor are you in any position to guage what level of damage your theft has.
you can only guess, and express your opinion, if for example, the pirated copy you made available replaces one that may have been legally purchased, then the damage you have done is take away a sale of his product.
what gives you the right to profit of his work, or to deny his ability to do the same ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
There may be a case where piracy does indeed harm an individual company, but there are also cases where it helps it. The point is, none of us here can really say yes or no for all cases.
Though I am not a lawyer, it would seem that the intent of the law is that, everyone can have access to anything, with ultimately it being the CREATOR's burden to deal with the repercussions of of other people's actions. It basically comes down to if a creator creates something and distributes it, if others come along see it and share it with others, they injure him in the sense that they have violated his right of control over copying something, but it is HIS responsibility to stop the people who are violating this right not anyone else's (hint this is why its civil not criminal law, the person who holds the copyright has to prove injury, and not even beyond a reasonable doubt).
Also interestingly enough I do think that it doesn't hurt them nearly as much as they claim, I mean, I constantly see the mantra of "Do not consume media that you didn't pay for" and wonder to myself if those people saying that realize what they're saying is: "Pay me, or ignore me." I am not a creator of material that I've attempted to sell but will also add that, I have always got the impression that most people who are actually interested in making art, or generally creating things are the kind of people that obscurity is the worst kind of hell for them. Maybe that's why we only see the inflammatory style AC's spouting that and not cool/kick-ass seeming folks (I'ma name drop Suja here) that make stuff spewing that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a joke
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What a joke
Although some people are irredeemable.
It's best to ignore those.
If you get your fairy godmother to magically stop piracy, you still gain nothing. You can't eat moral superiority.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What a joke
do you think those people will continue to put up that money if due to piracy their returns are not sufficient to invest ??
do you understand that due to priacy that things are not made. So the end result, if drawn to the end, is that nothing is created, so there is nothing to pirate..
there is allready a great deal NOT created for that reason..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What a joke
You completely missed the point...
They show others the way. You just have to ease up on the righteous indignation long enough to realize you need to adapt. --Clipped from Jedidiah's post.
Pirates are showing these people who bear the burden of development cost exactly what the market wants and the ways to get things out into the market, they developed these technologies as open markets. (That's that phrase that means that the pirates actually bore the development costs)
This actually reminds me of a poster I saw back in highschool. "When one door closes another opens... But often we look so long so regretfully upon the closed door that we fail to see the one that has opened for us."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What a joke
Not this again ... are you serious?
This ridiculous prediction has been debunked many times but it is still used - go figure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What a joke
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What a joke
It's one thing to make money, another to be like Mr. Krabs who sells both the rotten and paper variety of Krabby Patty to his customers because it's easier and cheaper for him.
Blizzard -could- fix Diablo 3 they have tons of money to do it but it's easier and cheaper for them to get idiots to buy a sub par product because of the brand name.
Chinamart- I mean, Walmart -could- have a better selection but it's easier and cheaper for them to have the bare minimum mostly made up of cheapy crap.
MAFIAA -could- fix their damn business model but it's easier for them to bitch and moan about piracy. The irony is that it's probably cheaper for them to embrace it, so they aren't even that good at making money!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What a joke
smart....... NOT..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What a joke
Could it be that some businesses are run differently than others? ..... I'm shocked and amazed.
Apparently there is a difference between running a business with the future in mind and simply running it into the ground by skimming all the proceeds.
In a market where there is competition, repeat customers are valued and therefore treated accordingly. Where a monopoly exists there is no incentive to value the customer because they have no choice. In this case, the phrase "charge what the market will bear" has a different meaning.
Many complaints about greedy business practice are not born out of an attempt to rationalize not paying, it's more a symptom of being charged too much where there is little to no alternative. Discontent within a market equals opportunity, this is a simple fact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just one...
not due to the downturn of the economy, not due to being run incompetently, not due to being bought out
But due to Piracy and piracy alone..
secondly, I'm tired of the AC's here calling me thief. I'm about to file a libel lawsuit against some of the AC's here for the slanderous accusation of being a thief. I'm willing to open my PC for forensic analysis to prove I have no "stolen" content...
then I can take all YOUR monies like the MPAA and the RIAA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Bullshit.
IBM published the specifications for all to see and use, there were no trade secrets, patents, or licensing requirements - this was done willingly and they acknowledge this, although in hindsight they have said that an opportunity was overlooked. The ramifications and resulting boom in the PC market has been discussed at length and in depth many times by many people. I'm somewhat surprised you are unaware of this or perhaps you are simply trying to spread bs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
how could you possibly know how many projects are NOT even started because once piracy is factored in the project is not viable.. the number would be high as it is something investors have to consider before deciding to invests.. you'll never know what you missed out on.. after all piracy does not actually produce anything..
they re-produce, ie that thing has to exist in the first place, if it is never created, it is never pirated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
This is a common argument put forth by those who pull numbers out of thin air. How 'bout we substitute some words and see if you like the result:
how could you possibly know how many projects are NOT even started because once Intellectual Property is factored in the projects are not viable
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
An interesting collary...
If you have to be a member in order to get any of the benefits, unless there are outside forces which will drive one to join them, people are not going to join.
In the 1950's and earlier, being a part of a church was an incredibly important part of local society, but in recent years, as society has fragmented in it's social presence, there is no longer any particular cache in being a church member, unless there is a particularly well attended church where all of the "local money members" happen to go. So church attendance has dropped significantly, since the only reason to go is because you're sold on their product.
Much of modern media is proceeding on this model. You're already sold on the product, and want to buy it...there's no real need to provide benefits for non-believers, because we refuse to accept that there is such a thing, or that non-believers hold any interest (or currency) for our organization.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: An interesting collary...
Isn't that backwards? If you have to join to get the benefits, there's more incentive to join, not less.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: An interesting collary...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: An interesting collary...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So MPAA and RIAA are not creating enough addiction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]