E. Zachary Knight (profile), 25 Jul 2011 @ 12:41pm
Thank you for this
This is the exact line of thinking that this site provides that led me to remove admin approval from my personal blogs. This site was directly responsible for that change on my sites.
I don't get a lot of comments yet, but I hope to do so for a few of them, but I learned that blocking comments or requiring registration to be a bad thing.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 25 Jul 2011 @ 12:29pm
Re: Re: Yes! Wolves increase the "quality" of sheep herds!
For an example of my second example there:
I like the show Mentalist from CBS. It is a fun show. I try to watch it whenever it is on. However, I do not have a DVR and when I miss an episode, there is no legal way for me to catch up on it. Warner, the shows producers, have for some reason deemed streaming of the show something they don't want to provide. So I end up having to pirate the show to watch missed episodes. However, if the show were offered on Hulu or even the CBS website, I would have watched it there rather than spend a few hours trying to find a site that has episodes up for download. Had it been on Hulu or CBS, they would have gotten ad revenue from me that they lost because they do not make the show available legally at all.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 25 Jul 2011 @ 12:25pm
Re: Yes! Wolves increase the "quality" of sheep herds!
On a slightly different point: HOW can creators "offer a better product ... increase the quality", when by definition they'd be competing AGAINST themselves?
No they are not competing with themselves. They are competing against a website that offers the same product for free. The goal of the provider is to offer something the other entity does not have or offer.
Example of win: Infringement site offers a shaky cam recording of the latest hit movie. Theatre owners offer 50 foot screens and 27.1 surround sound and uninterrupted video.
Example of loss: Infringement site offers HD rip of latest television show. If they show's producers even make the latest shows available for streaming, it is often in lower quality, late, and loaded with ads or a paywall.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 25 Jul 2011 @ 12:16pm
Re: Re: Re:
You still face the problem: If the quality of the content is better, is not the quality of what is pirated equally better?
Only if that quality is easily pirated. If you however offer something scarce that has value, then there is more incentive for pirates to become paying customers.
See Marcus Carab's example at the top of the comments thread.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 25 Jul 2011 @ 12:13pm
Re: Re: Re:
Not quite sure what you are asking. So I will attempt to throw a few things against the wall to see if they stick.
If the goal it to get someone to give you money, then the means to that end is to offer them something they actually value.
Let's look at Marcus Carab's example above. So a person is a big enough fan of Game of Thrones to watch the show, but not enough to pay for a subscription to HBO. So what do you do? Throw in some goodies that only people who pay can access. In Marcus' example, it is a limited seating to a Q&A with George R. R. Martin or the writers or Director of the show. This is a scarce commodity that has value to fans.
The object here is to get creative in how you part fans from their money. As long as you are adding value, it will be easier.
Simply upping the frame rate or resolution in non-pirated goods will not add that value. Contrary to what many people in *AA's and other similar organizations think, the content itself is not the most valuable part of their arsenal.
Using Turntable.fm as an example, the value is not in the content(music) it is in the social experience the application provides.
Same with Cinema. Sure people can download a shaky cam recording of the film, but the experience of actually going to the theatre is lost and thus the cam recording lacks value.
Even though your lemonade stand example is pretty terrible, I will attempt to use it. In your example, you are changing your business completely. Nobody wants music producers to stop producing music or only produce music for film and advertising. People still want music, just like people still want lemonade. If you are having trouble getting people to buy your lemonade, perhaps you can find something they will value more than just lemonade. For example, the drive in restaurant Sonic has a good idea. They let the customer customize their drinks with added flavors. So there is an idea to add value to lemonade. I am sure you can find others.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 25 Jul 2011 @ 11:38am
Re:
In answer to all of your questions:
Would poor subscriptions numbers have done the same?
Yes. By making more quality content, you would get more subscribers.
Would moving into a new market have done the same?
Not sure. It would depend on if the new market is not interested in the current content. If so then the answer above applies.
Would HBO increase the "quality" of their programming in relationship to any of these?
Already answered.
Also, how does increasing the content lower piracy?
If the quality offered is not available through piracy/infringement then yes.
Wouldn't there just be more to pirate?
See answer directly above.
I don't know. I think Mike comparison to the Emperor’s New Clothes is pretty apt. After all the Emperor was able to convince a whole kingdom that he was wearing something for a while.
The NYTimes has seen very little real revenue growth after this paywall. I doubt they will see much more.
This is the same nation whose leaders believe that because the vast majority of responses to their public opinion request was in favor of an R18 rating that they needed to get more opinions from the "silent majority"
You know, those people who don't care one way or the other.
What is really stupid is requiring unanimous rule to do anything. Any country that requires that a group of individuals meet and reach an unanimous consensus is a messed up country.
Re: Not naming sources is common practice in the journalism world
Unfortunately, what they create is less news and more shock entertainment. People rail against media personalities like Jerry Springer and Howard Stern because they take that shock entertainment to the extreme.
By not linking to the source piece, she is giving herself the ability to freely interpret what was originally said in any way shape or form of her choosing. She doesn't have to worry about people pointing out the flaws in her arguments because the majority who read her blog will take what she says at face value.
By not allowing comments on her blog, she adds additional "strength" to her argument by not allowing those who do take the time to figure out who she is talking about and reading her comments on it and posting corrections.
Scientists and primate handlers often give primates paints and paper. The primates then paint pictures using those tools the handlers prepared and left around.
The copyrights of those paintings are no more owned by the handlers than this picture is of the photographer.
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 13 Jul 2011 @ 10:16am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Meta-view: similarly, pontificate here as much as you can,
Yes, because the average person is going to have the resources to schedule a trip to DC, a meeting and pay for the representative's $75 lunch.
I think a VC might be able to wing it, but if that is what it takes to get the attention of your elected representative, then the average person is pretty much screwed.
I understand that elected officials receive a lot of mail, snail and electronic. However, it would be nice if this mail passed by an actual human's eye every once in a while.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Meta-view: similarly, pontificate here as much as you can,
I really didn't see this article as a slam on Protect IP as much as it was a slam on the road blocks that those who are against it must face to get heard by our elected officials.
If powerful VC's can't properly voice opposition to the bill with their elected representatives, what chance do those who lives will be destroyed when enforcement of the law starts have?
On a more serious note, I worked on an air force base as a civilian contractor and am quite familiar with mandatory "safe" outdated software and over powering firewall systems.
On the post: If Your Comment Section Is Awesome, It's Your Community's Fault
Thank you for this
I don't get a lot of comments yet, but I hope to do so for a few of them, but I learned that blocking comments or requiring registration to be a bad thing.
Thanks again.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re: Re: Yes! Wolves increase the "quality" of sheep herds!
I like the show Mentalist from CBS. It is a fun show. I try to watch it whenever it is on. However, I do not have a DVR and when I miss an episode, there is no legal way for me to catch up on it. Warner, the shows producers, have for some reason deemed streaming of the show something they don't want to provide. So I end up having to pirate the show to watch missed episodes. However, if the show were offered on Hulu or even the CBS website, I would have watched it there rather than spend a few hours trying to find a site that has episodes up for download. Had it been on Hulu or CBS, they would have gotten ad revenue from me that they lost because they do not make the show available legally at all.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re: Yes! Wolves increase the "quality" of sheep herds!
No they are not competing with themselves. They are competing against a website that offers the same product for free. The goal of the provider is to offer something the other entity does not have or offer.
Example of win: Infringement site offers a shaky cam recording of the latest hit movie. Theatre owners offer 50 foot screens and 27.1 surround sound and uninterrupted video.
Example of loss: Infringement site offers HD rip of latest television show. If they show's producers even make the latest shows available for streaming, it is often in lower quality, late, and loaded with ads or a paywall.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re: Re: Re:
Only if that quality is easily pirated. If you however offer something scarce that has value, then there is more incentive for pirates to become paying customers.
See Marcus Carab's example at the top of the comments thread.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re: Re: Re:
If the goal it to get someone to give you money, then the means to that end is to offer them something they actually value.
Let's look at Marcus Carab's example above. So a person is a big enough fan of Game of Thrones to watch the show, but not enough to pay for a subscription to HBO. So what do you do? Throw in some goodies that only people who pay can access. In Marcus' example, it is a limited seating to a Q&A with George R. R. Martin or the writers or Director of the show. This is a scarce commodity that has value to fans.
The object here is to get creative in how you part fans from their money. As long as you are adding value, it will be easier.
Simply upping the frame rate or resolution in non-pirated goods will not add that value. Contrary to what many people in *AA's and other similar organizations think, the content itself is not the most valuable part of their arsenal.
Using Turntable.fm as an example, the value is not in the content(music) it is in the social experience the application provides.
Same with Cinema. Sure people can download a shaky cam recording of the film, but the experience of actually going to the theatre is lost and thus the cam recording lacks value.
Even though your lemonade stand example is pretty terrible, I will attempt to use it. In your example, you are changing your business completely. Nobody wants music producers to stop producing music or only produce music for film and advertising. People still want music, just like people still want lemonade. If you are having trouble getting people to buy your lemonade, perhaps you can find something they will value more than just lemonade. For example, the drive in restaurant Sonic has a good idea. They let the customer customize their drinks with added flavors. So there is an idea to add value to lemonade. I am sure you can find others.
On the post: New Study: Piracy Increases The Quality Of Content
Re:
Would poor subscriptions numbers have done the same?
Yes. By making more quality content, you would get more subscribers.
Would moving into a new market have done the same?
Not sure. It would depend on if the new market is not interested in the current content. If so then the answer above applies.
Would HBO increase the "quality" of their programming in relationship to any of these?
Already answered.
Also, how does increasing the content lower piracy?
If the quality offered is not available through piracy/infringement then yes.
Wouldn't there just be more to pirate?
See answer directly above.
On the post: :Lobo Santo's Favorite Techdirt Articles of the Week
Re: Re: Re:
The NYTimes has seen very little real revenue growth after this paywall. I doubt they will see much more.
On the post: Is There A Difference Between Inspiration And Copying?
Re: Infringing photos
On the post: Gatekeepers And The Economy
Let us build more walls
And then charge you to get in
Creating more jobs
On the post: Australian Attorneys General Still Feel The Need To Think About The 37-Year-Old 'Children'
You know, those people who don't care one way or the other.
http://gamepolitics.com/2010/10/20/au-minister-we-need-more-public-feedback-r18
What is really stupid is requiring unanimous rule to do anything. Any country that requires that a group of individuals meet and reach an unanimous consensus is a messed up country.
On the post: Copyright Troll John Steele Insists That 70-Year Old Is Responsible For Porn Downloads... Even If Someone Else Used WiFi
I hope this guy loses hard.
On the post: The Copyright Alliance Blog Takes On Someone Who Wrote Something
Re: Not naming sources is common practice in the journalism world
On the post: The Copyright Alliance Blog Takes On Someone Who Wrote Something
By not allowing comments on her blog, she adds additional "strength" to her argument by not allowing those who do take the time to figure out who she is talking about and reading her comments on it and posting corrections.
It is a sad method of debate. \
On the post: Senator Gillibrand Thinks PROTECT IP Is About The Internet Kill Switch
On the post: Can We Subpoena The Monkey? Why The Monkey Self-Portraits Are Likely In The Public Domain
Re: Re:
Scientists and primate handlers often give primates paints and paper. The primates then paint pictures using those tools the handlers prepared and left around.
The copyrights of those paintings are no more owned by the handlers than this picture is of the photographer.
On the post: Can We Subpoena The Monkey? Why The Monkey Self-Portraits Are Likely In The Public Domain
Re:
On the post: Pro-IP Blogger Feels Raising The Level Of Debate Means Locking Up Your Comments And Throwing Around The Word 'Freetard'
Re: Comment thread hijack
On the post: Rep. Anna Eshoo (From Silicon Valley!) Thinks PROTECT IP Is About Immigration?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Meta-view: similarly, pontificate here as much as you can,
I think a VC might be able to wing it, but if that is what it takes to get the attention of your elected representative, then the average person is pretty much screwed.
I understand that elected officials receive a lot of mail, snail and electronic. However, it would be nice if this mail passed by an actual human's eye every once in a while.
On the post: Rep. Anna Eshoo (From Silicon Valley!) Thinks PROTECT IP Is About Immigration?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Meta-view: similarly, pontificate here as much as you can,
If powerful VC's can't properly voice opposition to the bill with their elected representatives, what chance do those who lives will be destroyed when enforcement of the law starts have?
On the post: Pro-IP Blogger Feels Raising The Level Of Debate Means Locking Up Your Comments And Throwing Around The Word 'Freetard'
Re: Re: Re:
Where do you work? A Cave?!?
On a more serious note, I worked on an air force base as a civilian contractor and am quite familiar with mandatory "safe" outdated software and over powering firewall systems.
Next >>