Quote:
Originally Posted by poshm
IThe majority of people wouldn't be bothered with piracy if they could get these items dirt cheap in the first place.
|
I used to think this was true. But, I've got so many pirate friends, and just a small amount of time talking to them about it and observing them... I really seriously doubt that they would buy any of what they pirate. In fact, I don't think they value what they have much at all and this is the root of their justification of the piracy. They don't see it as having value and thus can't possibly be theft in taking it.
Sure they enjoy their illicit movies when they watch them, but I kid you not, most of these guys clearly get more joy out of having things to help others pirate than they get from consumption of that same media.
No, at this point I'm fairly sure that a large portion of (internet/download-based) pirates would still pirate things, even if they only costed $2 or something otherwise impossibly cheap.
And on the same token, if somehow DRM really stopped them from pirating these "things," then I also firmly stand by the opinion that the majority of them would never purchase the items instead. I think this is especially true of movies and music. Movies and music, for most people represent a fleeting moment of entertainment that they could have just as easily lived without, with the occasional exception of something that really turns them on. So for these people, the radio (free), pirated music (free), the theatre (not free but a social occasion), and broadcast/cable tv (free/kinda free, like anyone thinks of the price of an individual program on cable) would be enough for them. If they couldn't get "free" access to this same media, it just wouldn't be part of their life.
If these same types of people can't get free access to their books/movies/music/games/etc. online, then they would just spent their time on something else.
Clearly i'm not referring to professional piracy for monetary gain here, but, honestly, the premise that somehow the fairness of price plays into the decision to steal vs. buy is preposterous in my opinion. It is the same line of flawed thinking that leads to ridiculous reports of "Lost revenue" from piracy, as if every download represented what otherwise would have been a sale. Hah! That's as bad as suggesting that everyone who sees a billboard for a soda but doesn't buy one is somehow lost money.
That said, I do agree that when DRM is in use it should be mandatory that it's very clearly explained and any limits that might apply should be boldly presented to the purchaser at every single purchase. I'm especially bitter about the term "buy" associated with what is really licensing. You can't go showing people a storefront where the term buy, 90% of the time, means to initiate the exchange of money for the ownership of an item then suddenly have it also mean the exchange of money for the right to access some data in a limited manner. That's just disingenuous. Amazon, or any other digital media seller should be barred from using the same terms for sales and licensing.
Then don't get me started on arbitrary limits. At least back when Apple iTunes used DRM on music it was clear what the limits would be, if only because they were always the same. Five "machines." Unlimited iPods. Simple, though still DRM. On Amazon it's all kinds of restrictions, about tts, number of copies, etc. And to have the gall to suggest one buy another "copy" so they can go beyond the potentially very strict device limit is pure hubris. If it is only ME reading/accessing the data, then I should be able to do it wherever and whenever I want without worries about how many "copies" are made and how many devices are involved.
Ranting again! Sorry. I do feel strongly about this topic, though I don't necessarily take the hard line on it. I *DO* buy DRM'd things. For example, I own almost 500 DVDs. I have about 20 Blu-ray discs, and I can't even rip those currently. I paid for about 100 protected songs from iTunes but only because I could strip the DRM without ruining the audio quality. I buy from Amazon, to get books for a decent price, but only if I think I can rip the DRM. Sadly I have a few books I can't rip properly either because they are topaz or because the ripping tools are just failing to produce valid results.
But over time, I am being pushed more and more to that almost activist level of refusing any DRM at all. I just don't like to be so limited by an idealism. But still, I don't read so much that I would be entirely starved by going DRM-free. I could subsist for a few months on Doctorow and Watts alone I imagine. I have a Steve Jordan book to read still... I don't mind paying. In fact, I feel eBooks in particular are too cheap.
But man, do I ever hate artificial limits that solve no problems.