And lets also remember all those who start reading the book but never finish it, for whatever reason: it sucks, they found something better to read, changes in life, etc. And at that point what would be considered a lost sale too? After reading 10% of it? Or 25%? Or 75%?
And lets not forget also those that even though they finished it, they considered it complete shite and a waste of time, is there a refund in that case?
Well yes, the hungry is thinking on how to get food. The struggling is thinking how to get a little less struggled aka a bit more money or a higher paying job. A middle classer is thinking how to get a bigger car (after selling the current one of course). But one who owns a private island, well, one who owns a private island is only thinking how to get a thousand more of those, at whatever the cost.
Yes! A Netflix for books. Yes. I second that. But not only the cheap ass books from yestercentury or the bmovies i mean obscure books that are just niche for a few people. The new books, the classics, the bestsellers, the masterpieces, the complete works, etc, they all have to be there. Otherwise we will end up in the same place as today, people using Netflix to shut the mouths of kids and lousy girlfriends, and still using kodi and torrents and else to get the new stuff and keep those peoples with their mouths shut (lol).
A netflix for games wouldn't be that bad either, yes GOG and such are good but more can be done.
Again, all falls back, always, to the huge and greedy profit expectations of the authors or their distributors or rights holders.
The problem is that the argument: "don't want to pay don't buy it"....is flawed, really flawed.
First, most people is not that they don't want to pay but they CANNOT. No money! More than half of the world population lives on less than 2 USD per day, according to UN and World Bank data. So "don't want to pay" is a lie. The correct assertion would be can't afford it.
So what would be your answer to that? Fill in the blank: "if you cannot afford it then ________". There are 2 main options: 1) fukk off, 2) get it somehow...
Second, that argument is forgetting that people are FREE to copy and share information as much as they want, this is a natural right. Regardless of what some for-profit stupid law has to say about it. Remember, laws have to adjust to peoples uses and customs, not the other way around. We don't have to stop sharing just because a law says so, so a few can keep their profits flowing. If my buddy lends me his copy of his ebook then i can just make a copy for myself, who is to say otherwise? better yet? who is going to enforce the opposite and come after me? Trying to enforce the unenforceable.
With the amount of media produced these days, so called "over saturation" or whatever...now we have the option to simply check out something else that actually wants to be checked out.
And lets not forget Maslow. According to him, for (most) sane families, and individuals, paying for ebooks, movies, music, aka entertainment will come at the very last of the list of the priorities of all those expenses they have to make through out their lives.
Re: Re: No, you're looking at it wrong, still: this says people who can pay simply won't.
That is if your internet is working fine at the moment and there is no congestion as it occurs in many places on sunda nights for example. I find it easier on Kodi.
If those people are innocent they should just contact the DEA and explain the origin of the monies, that is why the DEA left a card with contact information.
Still, i agree with you. Those people are innocent until proven guilty in DUE PROCESS, and none of their assets (including freedom of movement) should be taken away until a sentence has been declared.
Ignore google. What is the legal definition of it? Or just ask the guy directly what he meant to avoid any controversy (this should be one of the duties of press).
So you are saying the DEA are stupid. That's it huh? Then close that institution right now, they could cause a nuclear war later, "unintentionally".
You mean they are INTENTIONALLY not keeping track. Hope you were being sarcastic or just a honest typo. No benefit of the doubt for them.
How idiotic would be to say they unintentionally don't keep track of some things? What? This is an institution that has decades, one of the foundations of USA "justice", and they unintentionally do things? If they are so STUPID or NEGLIGENT (or simply LIARS) to not keep track of some pretty basic stuff, then they should not exist as an institution.
Has it ever been about anything else than money? Ever? I mean, come on, just look at the big picture: everything is supposedly done for your safety and your rights, but you keep losing freedoms all the time (more work time and more taxes?), your rights being abused all the time (all those police killing innocent people for example), all that surveillance and spying, and yet, they CANNOT guarantee your safety. On the contrary, they keep "allowing" all kinds of junk foods, all kinds of dangerous products, etc that we are not aware of but will kill you, without our knowledge let alone our consent.
I guess that is why they keep some drugs illegal. To make more money from all those forfeitures.
The contradiction: "we will bring peace by bombing the fukk out of everyone else"
People should be able to put whatever substance they want in their bodies, KNOWINGLY and CONSCIOUSLY. That is freedom. But some idiots prefer to make it illegal and then abuse all those "criminals", from their rights and their monies. It is also well known, that a vast number of people in jails in the US are there because of drug related crimes, mostly possession of relatively small quantities.
Look at the big picture, today, despite of what they argue, people work longer hours, purchasing power is decreasing for the majority and we live in the biggest concentration of wealth in fewer hands, aka inequality. It has always been about the money.
Again, white supremacist racism and bigotry has long ago been established. If not ask Rodney King, or look at the composition of both houses in government. Or look at fortune 500.
You missed the point. Again, we don't need to defeat trump, or defeat obama, or bush or whatever, we need to defeat these ways that put us the common folk against each other, we need to defeat corruption, inequality, war, etc.
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re:
And lets not forget also those that even though they finished it, they considered it complete shite and a waste of time, is there a refund in that case?
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re: Same old same old
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re:
A netflix for games wouldn't be that bad either, yes GOG and such are good but more can be done.
Again, all falls back, always, to the huge and greedy profit expectations of the authors or their distributors or rights holders.
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re:
First, most people is not that they don't want to pay but they CANNOT. No money! More than half of the world population lives on less than 2 USD per day, according to UN and World Bank data. So "don't want to pay" is a lie. The correct assertion would be can't afford it.
So what would be your answer to that? Fill in the blank: "if you cannot afford it then ________". There are 2 main options: 1) fukk off, 2) get it somehow...
Second, that argument is forgetting that people are FREE to copy and share information as much as they want, this is a natural right. Regardless of what some for-profit stupid law has to say about it. Remember, laws have to adjust to peoples uses and customs, not the other way around. We don't have to stop sharing just because a law says so, so a few can keep their profits flowing. If my buddy lends me his copy of his ebook then i can just make a copy for myself, who is to say otherwise? better yet? who is going to enforce the opposite and come after me? Trying to enforce the unenforceable.
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re:
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re: Re: No, you're looking at it wrong, still: this says people who can pay simply won't.
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re: Re: Re: No, you're looking at it wrong, still: this says people who can pay simply won't.
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re: Re: Speaking as a prolific (and much older) ebook pirate...
On the post: eBook Pirates Tend To Be Older And Well Off, Which Means They Pirate Because Of Human Intuition On Economics
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: The Cord Cutting The Cable Industry Says Isn't Happening, Keeps Happening
Re: Re: Re:
I think none of this is the problem. The problem, and the story over and over, is the high profits those industries expect and generate at all costs.
On the post: The Cord Cutting The Cable Industry Says Isn't Happening, Keeps Happening
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Report Says DEA Doesn't Even Know If The Billions In Cash It Seizes Is Having Any Impact On Criminal Activity
Re:
Still, i agree with you. Those people are innocent until proven guilty in DUE PROCESS, and none of their assets (including freedom of movement) should be taken away until a sentence has been declared.
On the post: Report Says DEA Doesn't Even Know If The Billions In Cash It Seizes Is Having Any Impact On Criminal Activity
Re: Gotta Love the Ambiguity
On the post: Report Says DEA Doesn't Even Know If The Billions In Cash It Seizes Is Having Any Impact On Criminal Activity
Re: Re: Gotta Love the Ambiguity
You mean they are INTENTIONALLY not keeping track. Hope you were being sarcastic or just a honest typo. No benefit of the doubt for them.
How idiotic would be to say they unintentionally don't keep track of some things? What? This is an institution that has decades, one of the foundations of USA "justice", and they unintentionally do things? If they are so STUPID or NEGLIGENT (or simply LIARS) to not keep track of some pretty basic stuff, then they should not exist as an institution.
On the post: Report Says DEA Doesn't Even Know If The Billions In Cash It Seizes Is Having Any Impact On Criminal Activity
I guess that is why they keep some drugs illegal. To make more money from all those forfeitures.
The contradiction: "we will bring peace by bombing the fukk out of everyone else"
People should be able to put whatever substance they want in their bodies, KNOWINGLY and CONSCIOUSLY. That is freedom. But some idiots prefer to make it illegal and then abuse all those "criminals", from their rights and their monies. It is also well known, that a vast number of people in jails in the US are there because of drug related crimes, mostly possession of relatively small quantities.
Look at the big picture, today, despite of what they argue, people work longer hours, purchasing power is decreasing for the majority and we live in the biggest concentration of wealth in fewer hands, aka inequality. It has always been about the money.
On the post: 'Fake News' Now Means Whatever People Want It To Mean, And Legislating It Away Is A Slippery Slope Toward Censorship
On the post: 'Fake News' Now Means Whatever People Want It To Mean, And Legislating It Away Is A Slippery Slope Toward Censorship
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: 'Fake News' Now Means Whatever People Want It To Mean, And Legislating It Away Is A Slippery Slope Toward Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: 'Fake News' Now Means Whatever People Want It To Mean, And Legislating It Away Is A Slippery Slope Toward Censorship
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>