true, but what will stop you from copying a book you borrowed from the library or scanning it on to the computer? the content is made available to the public freely. The point is that if we complain that the exchange of information needs to be charged or else no information will be generated, then the rejoinder becomes that libraries didn't destroy the market for books by making them free - they encouraged the market. yes, you have to return the book, but now most libraries will let you renew your checkout online anyhow, enabling you to keep it for quite some time.
want to read it again? check it out again.
want to read an ebook? boot up your computer.
the same modicum of inconvenience exists, just in a modified form.
can we please try to keep threads free of ad hominem attacks? really.
If you think that Miike is wrong, prove it. otherwise, don't just attack him. He's done plenty of research to form an educated opinion. You don't have to read it, you don't have to agree with it.
Also, bringing politics into the thread to derail it? not exactly an appropriate move. Please treat this thread, this debate, and the people involved in it with respect, sirs.
Mike isn't saying that someone MUST do so. he is simply pointing out the ramifications of NOT doing it.
The library didn't kill the consumer market for books. eBooks won't either, even if they are free.
Ultimately, Mike is saying that whether or not you choose to recognize it, you content will get out there digitally, and youu can either shriek and complain and try to sue hundreds of people at subtantial cost to yourself, or you can try to find an effective method of leveraging that popularity into profit.
When people pirate your work, it is because they see it as worthwhile, as having value. find a way to use that, not run from it.
You don't have to.
But don't get upset then when your lack of understanding of the market and poor acumen means you don't get that bundle of money you were wishing for.
here's an example of art without compensation:
grafitti (i mean that in a good way)
performance artist often do it for nothing
and sites like flickr, YouTube, and DeviantArt are awash with incredible and unique creations.
Money isn't the incentive for those who produce truly excellent art. Art is.
I'm not sure why I'm responding to someone who is simply trying to be incendiary, but your ad hominem attack is really inappropriate.
No one is talking about stealing from authors. what we are discussing are market mechanics and how it would be possible to view the essentially infinite good (information - writing - text itself) as a vehicle to sell the scarce good (books - movies - IDEAS - author who GENERATES PROFITABLE IDEAS)
By all means, I pay for books - my wife keeps on threatening to throw them out because we have too many for our 1 bedroom apartment.
The key is, as you said, to "pay the author of a GOOD book" - not all books are good, and not all authors deserve payment. Big ticket authors will sell regardless, and still have million dollar contracts. It's the small guys who DESERVE to be heard that the eBook system will help - enabling publishers to gauge who is truly worthy by determining which authors are the most downloaded.
These authors of GOOD books WILL be paid whether we buy their books or not, while the creators of poor and mediocre content will have to improve or drop out of the market.
What about the Rennessiance, where poets, philosophers, scientists, and artists were supported almost exclusively through a third party pension or sponsor? Perhaps we shall see a certain recurrence of the trend?
I think people are missing one major factor in the whole "book selling" model: movies.
how many authors/publishers have had proprietary works turned into major motion pictures since the advent of film? Even barring the recent trend of comic book adaptations and Shakespearean classics, the number is incredibly high.
Atonement, the Girl with the Pearl Earring, Golden Compass, Chronicles of Narnia, Lord of the Rings, HARRY POTTER etc. etc. etc.
And these movies make their authors MILLIONS of dollars. And then there is the ancillary products: toys, games, lunchboxes, etc., ALL of which CANNOT be pirated even.
The expansion of eBook offerings, like the expansion of free movie content, ensures that those individuals who are valued by the public most are given the largest audience, thereby ensuring they will be tapped over the mediocre offerings of hack writers for further endorsement and film production. We are seeing this now on YouTube, where actors and comedians who would have passed into obscurity in the real world are found by talent seekers for the value of their content. eBooks do the exact same thing for printed media.
As an added bonus, the quality of our movie scripts should increase as better and more unique writing is encouraged as opposed to formulaic horror and action by big names (I'm talking to you, Mr. Lamp-monster Steven King and Tom Clancy).
If you will insist that this only favors a minority of authors, all you are saying is that "Only those authors whose story is entertaining enough to the public will receive such endorsements." Ergo - The MARKET will chose which authors it wants to reward with wealth for their production. Which is how the whole system is supposed to work anyhow, isn't it?
I think people are missing one major factor in the whole "book selling" model: movies.
how many authors/publishers have had proprietary works turned into major motion pictures since the advent of film?
Even barring the recent trend of comic book adaptations and Shakespearean classics, the number is incredibly high.
Atonement, the Girl with the Pearl Earring, Golden Compass, Chronicles of Narnia, Lord of the Rings, HARRY POTTER etc. etc. etc.
And these movies make their authors MILLIONS of dollars. And then there is the ancillary products: toys, games, lunchboxes, etc., ALL of which CANNOT be pirated even.
If you will insist that this only favors a minority of authors, all you are saying is that "Only those authors whose story is entertaining enough to the public will receive such endorsements." Ergo - The MARKET will chose which authors it wants to reward with wealth for their production. Which is how the whole system is supposed to work anyhow, isn't it?
On the post: Free Doesn't Mean Unpaid
Re: Re: Free
want to read it again? check it out again.
want to read an ebook? boot up your computer.
the same modicum of inconvenience exists, just in a modified form.
On the post: Free Doesn't Mean Unpaid
to angry and anon.
If you think that Miike is wrong, prove it. otherwise, don't just attack him. He's done plenty of research to form an educated opinion. You don't have to read it, you don't have to agree with it.
Also, bringing politics into the thread to derail it? not exactly an appropriate move. Please treat this thread, this debate, and the people involved in it with respect, sirs.
On the post: Free Doesn't Mean Unpaid
angry dude
The library didn't kill the consumer market for books. eBooks won't either, even if they are free.
Ultimately, Mike is saying that whether or not you choose to recognize it, you content will get out there digitally, and youu can either shriek and complain and try to sue hundreds of people at subtantial cost to yourself, or you can try to find an effective method of leveraging that popularity into profit.
When people pirate your work, it is because they see it as worthwhile, as having value. find a way to use that, not run from it.
You don't have to.
But don't get upset then when your lack of understanding of the market and poor acumen means you don't get that bundle of money you were wishing for.
On the post: Free Doesn't Mean Unpaid
art without compensation
grafitti (i mean that in a good way)
performance artist often do it for nothing
and sites like flickr, YouTube, and DeviantArt are awash with incredible and unique creations.
Money isn't the incentive for those who produce truly excellent art. Art is.
On the post: Free Doesn't Mean Unpaid
No one is talking about stealing from authors. what we are discussing are market mechanics and how it would be possible to view the essentially infinite good (information - writing - text itself) as a vehicle to sell the scarce good (books - movies - IDEAS - author who GENERATES PROFITABLE IDEAS)
By all means, I pay for books - my wife keeps on threatening to throw them out because we have too many for our 1 bedroom apartment.
The key is, as you said, to "pay the author of a GOOD book" - not all books are good, and not all authors deserve payment. Big ticket authors will sell regardless, and still have million dollar contracts. It's the small guys who DESERVE to be heard that the eBook system will help - enabling publishers to gauge who is truly worthy by determining which authors are the most downloaded.
These authors of GOOD books WILL be paid whether we buy their books or not, while the creators of poor and mediocre content will have to improve or drop out of the market.
On the post: Free Doesn't Mean Unpaid
Bookselling movies?
I think people are missing one major factor in the whole "book selling" model: movies.
how many authors/publishers have had proprietary works turned into major motion pictures since the advent of film? Even barring the recent trend of comic book adaptations and Shakespearean classics, the number is incredibly high.
Atonement, the Girl with the Pearl Earring, Golden Compass, Chronicles of Narnia, Lord of the Rings, HARRY POTTER etc. etc. etc.
And these movies make their authors MILLIONS of dollars. And then there is the ancillary products: toys, games, lunchboxes, etc., ALL of which CANNOT be pirated even.
The expansion of eBook offerings, like the expansion of free movie content, ensures that those individuals who are valued by the public most are given the largest audience, thereby ensuring they will be tapped over the mediocre offerings of hack writers for further endorsement and film production. We are seeing this now on YouTube, where actors and comedians who would have passed into obscurity in the real world are found by talent seekers for the value of their content. eBooks do the exact same thing for printed media.
As an added bonus, the quality of our movie scripts should increase as better and more unique writing is encouraged as opposed to formulaic horror and action by big names (I'm talking to you, Mr. Lamp-monster Steven King and Tom Clancy).
If you will insist that this only favors a minority of authors, all you are saying is that "Only those authors whose story is entertaining enough to the public will receive such endorsements." Ergo - The MARKET will chose which authors it wants to reward with wealth for their production. Which is how the whole system is supposed to work anyhow, isn't it?
How's that for a business model?
On the post: Yet Another Author Discovers Giving Away Ebooks Increases Sales
Alternative models
how many authors/publishers have had proprietary works turned into major motion pictures since the advent of film?
Even barring the recent trend of comic book adaptations and Shakespearean classics, the number is incredibly high.
Atonement, the Girl with the Pearl Earring, Golden Compass, Chronicles of Narnia, Lord of the Rings, HARRY POTTER etc. etc. etc.
And these movies make their authors MILLIONS of dollars. And then there is the ancillary products: toys, games, lunchboxes, etc., ALL of which CANNOT be pirated even.
If you will insist that this only favors a minority of authors, all you are saying is that "Only those authors whose story is entertaining enough to the public will receive such endorsements." Ergo - The MARKET will chose which authors it wants to reward with wealth for their production. Which is how the whole system is supposed to work anyhow, isn't it?
How's that for a business model?
Next >>