05-28-2008, 02:58 PM | #31 |
Evangelist
Posts: 499
Karma: 20623
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Salem & NYC, NY
Device: Kindle Global, iphone4, ipad
|
People can go out and shoot one another too, but that doesn't mean society should not decide to inflict penalties and punishment if they do. Since the advent of copying machines, it has been possible to reproduce and distribute books illegally. New technology has made that easier: if I understand you correctly, this means we should find a new business model and forget about copyright enforcement. Maybe this is a losing battle, but I am sure that if the punishment for illegal copying is severe enough (huge monetary fines, for example) then copyright will continue to mean something. I have seen a similar battle in the world of trademarks, where I spend some of my time: domain names have made trademark enforcement (generally protected by national laws) much harder, but because the price for domain name thieves and even nations can be extremely high, there have been plenty of triumphs. It's certainly a challenge to come up with effective protections, but the idea that technological advances have made enforcement of ip protections difficult if not impossible I do not accept.
|
05-28-2008, 05:21 PM | #32 | |
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
Quote:
In the digital world a "copying machine" is now a free piece of software, the expertise required is essentially being able to click a mouse, and there are no raw materials since it's all digital. Basically, digitial copies are now easy to make and free. What changed is that you don't need to be making money at it in order to be able to do it since there are no longer large costs that need to be recouped. It is now trivial for the average person to be a large scale digital distributor. This means that the real distributors aren't seen as providing any additional value, so people will be less and less willing to pay for that link in the chain. Artists still provide value, because the content is what people want. However, there is no longer as much need for a middle man to distribute content. In the old business model, it's the middle men that were making the most money. They are very powerful and have a lot of incentive to resist change, but I don't think it's going to last forever. I'm not advocating eliminating copyright, there still needs to be some guarantee that an artist will make enough money from creating a work that they are encouraged to create, but in the digital world there no longer is a need to guarantee them enough protection to offset production/distribution as well. There have been a lot of extensions/penalties added to copyright that protect the large distributors. Harsher penalties may prolong things, but ultimately that's not what this is about. The reality is that in the future, distribution of digital content is a lot less relevant than it used to be when products were physical. That means that the model that placed the majority of the profit in the distributors hands will change as well. I think the original intent of copyright started to go wrong when it became more about protecting the large corporate middle men than it did about protecting the individual artists. It's the middle men that are being threatened by changes in how the business model will work. The trick is figuring out a new model that will work. Creating the content still has value, but copying/distributing the content doesn't. That's where things get interesting. One method that some people are talking about is taking what used to be one of the highest parts of the price of an artistic work and turning it into either free or very low cost (valuable distribution has become trivial distribution in a digital environment). Then figuring out a way to make money for your labor in creating the original content elsewhere. Either as services (concerts) or additional offshoot products. The key for authors is to figure out something that works for them. Most of the ideas I've seen being thrown around in this area are more geared towards musicians than authors (probably because for most people that's where the focus is). Authors need to figure out what value they provide to consumers other than production/distribution of the book that will let them make a living from the labor of creating the book. That's the piece that's still missing, and finding the answer is not going to be easy. |
|
05-28-2008, 05:34 PM | #33 |
Evangelist
Posts: 499
Karma: 20623
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Salem & NYC, NY
Device: Kindle Global, iphone4, ipad
|
I agree with you. Incredibly (or perhaps not so incredibly) Congress has gone to great lengths to protect what you call the "distributor" in lengthening, at very times over the past years, the term of copyright. This is a boon to companies like Disney that can now tie up their wares for ever longer periods, which was not the intention of the drafters of the Constitution. My concern is protecting the creator, but that means fighting the Disneys who see their interests threatened. Unfortunately, what digital has facilitated is piracy (cf. China), and only strong criminal law enforcement will help there, but only if the jurisdiction in question agrees. We shall see.
|
05-29-2008, 09:09 AM | #34 | |||
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The catch is, you have to be diligent, intelligent, and cooperative, to make that malleability work. That combination has become hard to come by lately, but it's not impossible. It just requires people to stop avoiding the issue, rolling over to government malaise, and allowing the Disneys of the world absolute control over the system. All the talk about "killing off old copyright laws," "giving up on the old system," is just defeatest and lazy, and ultimately would be a disaster. The copyright system can be adapted to the new digital world. All we have to do is commit to getting it done properly. That's all. |
|||
05-29-2008, 10:08 AM | #35 | |
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
Quote:
Authors need to adapt their model so that they make profit off of the writing of the book, and then will need to start working on the next book if they want to continue making a living as an author (which is how it already works for everybody else). Realistically, they (or whoever they sell the rights to) no longer have a monopoly as the distributor once the digital work is released, so can't count on that service as their revenue source. Distribution is not where the money is anymore. |
|
05-29-2008, 11:56 AM | #36 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 19,832
Karma: 11844413
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tampa, FL USA
Device: Kindle Touch
|
I don't think that's true at all. While a small portion of the retail price of a book goes to the printing an distrbution most of the money goes to the retailer, the wholesaler, the publisher and the author. Also, the publisher usually spends money to market and promote a book.
BOb |
05-29-2008, 12:28 PM | #37 |
Evangelist
Posts: 499
Karma: 20623
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Salem & NYC, NY
Device: Kindle Global, iphone4, ipad
|
Bob, when you say, "a small portion of the retail price of a book goes to the printing an distribution most of the money goes to the retailer, the wholesaler, the publisher and the author", I don't think you are saying anything different. The retailer, wholesaler and publisher are all part of the printing/selling chain, i.e. the distribution chain, and it is precisely that chain that is eliminated by digital.
|
05-29-2008, 12:42 PM | #38 | ||
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'll grant that the old business model is being turned upside down by digital distribution. However, requiring the author to take on an additional (and essentially menial) job to make money is counter-productive, and will not encourage anyone to become an artist. Another method of payment needs to be found. I've suggested elsewhere either the patronage model (rich guy looking for tax deduction finances your artistic endeavors), or the advertisers model (a company pays you to add their advertising to your work, like a TV commercial or product placement finances a TV show), to finance artists. This makes much more sense, for it encourages the artist to work on their art, not selling pencils, while the patron or advertiser supports them. And the added value of this is that it largely removes the concern about "piracy" of works, because consumers do not have to pay for the work... they just have to see it, to satisfy the patron/advertiser (who is banking on self-promotion or product sales based on the exposure in the artist's work). This would solve many of the issues that copyright attempts to satisfy, by taking it out of the consumer's concern, and making it the patron/advertiser's concern. E-publishing can adopt an advertising model right now... publications are already essentially operating on a combination of advertising and subscription/counter sales (and some mags and papers don't even charge at the counter... they are solely supported by ads). The removal of physical printing and distribution should allow a significant lowering of production costs that can be absorbed by a combination of advertisers and subscriptions. |
||
05-29-2008, 03:07 PM | #39 | ||||
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
05-29-2008, 03:35 PM | #40 | |
Beepbeep n beebeep, yeah!
Posts: 11,726
Karma: 8255450
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Crosse, Wisconsin, aka America's IceBox
Device: iThingie, KmkII, I miss Zelda!
|
Quote:
|
|
05-29-2008, 04:07 PM | #41 |
MIA ... but returning som
Posts: 1,600
Karma: 511342
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Germany
Device: PRS-505 and *Really* not owning a PRS-700
|
@shaggy: And musicians do still - and will continue to - earn money for each sell.
Yes, I DO NOT like DRM. Not at all. But: I still assume, that selling a book should give you money - just as well as selling software (which is essentially the same) should make you money. Enough money for an author to continue living from his book-sells, for a developer to continue living from his software. I do both - programming and writing (not published yet) - and I want to get money for both. Not for some obscure "second market" (dont want to sell shirts, really), but for the product itself. I do not know how this can be achieved. But - on the other side - using a kind of "serial number" would be a possibility, just like registering books online to specific devices, etc - look at software, it's essentially the same problem (and the same solutions can be used). |
05-29-2008, 04:12 PM | #42 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
|
05-29-2008, 04:28 PM | #43 | |||
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
Quote:
Quote:
An obscure "second market" for software is charging for support. There's already a huge number of companies out there that have adopted the business model of giving the software away for free, but charging for a support service. Open Source software is the one that people think of the most, but even companies like Oracle, Sun, IBM, etc (which historically made a lot of money off of sales) are giving away their software for free these days and making all of their money from support contracts. Quote:
|
|||
05-29-2008, 04:43 PM | #44 | ||||
MIA ... but returning som
Posts: 1,600
Karma: 511342
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Germany
Device: PRS-505 and *Really* not owning a PRS-700
|
Quote:
It is easy to copy MP3 - but they still get selled. Quote:
Quote:
Yes, there are many possible business models - e.g. flatrates, monthly paying, additional services, etc and authors will need to adopt. But they will continue to earn money selling (e-)books and this is as it should be. Perhaps a flatrate? Calculate it - the complete industrie will earn more and it is possible to calculate market shares to calculate the profit of each author / musician / etc. Authors selling their eBooks and special "additional packages"? Or direct selling of unprotected books (yes, it gets paid), etc There are many possible models. Quote:
Can you copy copyprotected DVDs? Without any problem. Can I do this? Without any second problem. Do I still buy (and rend) DVDs? Yes. And most people I know do this as well - and not only since "breaking a copyright" is illegal in germany. Hell - you can break ANY system... So? Where is the problem? Most people still buy their software (not all, but a large chunk). What about e.g. letting you download a book, then entering a serial for that given device, a short connection to the server validating your serial (and registering that book-serial to that device, so that you can share with a number of people and devices, but not with everyone) and then giving you access to that book? Can it be broken? Yes. Even when using hard cryptografic approaches (each device with a given security-chip and a book-encryption specific to that chip, etc). Will most people break it? No. Not if the deal is fair - e.g. reading the book on multiple readers in your family, etc It's not about unbreakable DRM - we can agree on this one. That the industrie is continuing to try to enforce something as laughable as this (see BluRay, Windows Vista, WMA, DRM'd eBooks, etc) is ridiculous. But thats really not the point. (Oh and we can agree that DRM in its current usage is evil). And yes, authors (and the whole publishing industrie) need to adopt to the new market - but not to the point, that they give up earning with their products. Last edited by tirsales; 05-29-2008 at 04:54 PM. |
||||
05-29-2008, 05:22 PM | #45 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 19,832
Karma: 11844413
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tampa, FL USA
Device: Kindle Touch
|
Quote:
As a programmer, if I wrote a program that I was selling, I would expect to get paid for every copy of it... even though making a copy is [close to] free. The value isn't in the CD it is shipped on, it is the benefit the end user derives from it. Much software is not sold [licensed] for $X as a download or $X + $Y for a shipped CD with packaging. The extra cost covers the package, shiping and handling. Why should books be any different just because the delivery method changed... only the cost of that deliver method should be adjusted, the royalties the author makes should be the same. BOb (TO SELF: No more never ending threads!) |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Two Canadian concerns about the nook | ereaderwanabe | Which one should I buy? | 9 | 08-12-2010 06:30 PM |
I think this review encapsulates my concerns with the edge | davidspitzer | News | 29 | 03-28-2010 04:10 AM |
Problems encountered and Overcome - PRS-600 | Onecanuck | Sony Reader | 2 | 01-31-2010 07:53 PM |
Can Calibre overcome basic e-reader limitations for schools? - ZDNet | nboshart | News | 13 | 01-25-2010 04:34 PM |
In Copyright? - Copyright Renewal Database launched | Alexander Turcic | News | 26 | 07-09-2008 09:36 AM |