Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Ah... okay, I've got it, too, and I agree, it's a good point. (I confess, I really thought you were just arguing for giving it all away!  ) |
Well, in a way, I am. Because I think the changes are good, overall. I think it's painful for people used to the old way of doing things, but all in all, I think the benefits of free information outweigh the downsides.
But regardless of whether you think it's good or bad, it's inevitable. The question is no longer "is this a good thing", but "what do we do in this new reality?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Anyway, when described like that, it makes the situation sound even more dire. Your observations suggest that: The laws need to be rewritten; DRM needs to be better (I know, I know); and ultimately, it won't matter one way or the other unless an entirely new compensation model is applied. Actually, I think that if 1 and 2 are applied, 3 may not be necessary... but you might say the same about almost any combination of the 3. Besides, making substantive changes to any of the above will be a huge undertaking.
|
No, I think both DRM and laws are doomed to fail, and are more harmful than the alternative.
3 has to happen, basically, and it will. It might take a while, and there will undoubtedly be people who fall through the cracks. But eventually we'll find a new way to create content.
3 is also the most flexible of the above options - laws are tough to get right, technology is full of bugs and expensive, but there are thousands of content creators who have a very, very good reason to find a new way of making a living. So I think that part is inevitable, too.