MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

mrkai · 12-10-2007, 07:35 PM

After Steve decided to insult me, I kind of walked away from this but as i have been addressed directly, I shall add more commentary.

First off: I am not an advocate of "free content"...I am merely an observer in the reality of the situation.

Harry: The Actions of the RIAA and MPAA have had an effect Zero impact. Really. In fact, many in the US Congress have decided to take a closer look at these actions as they seem to constitute a level of heavyhanded punishment.

The issue of property isn't irrelevant, it just isn't realistic. The only way to have exclusive distribution of digital products is to bring the customer to you in the brick and mortar world...something that has even less appeal.

The notion that someone is getting away with something, too, is wrongheaded thinking. Anyone that acquires counterfeit digital product in my experience is getting a lesser product than the "original" legal counterfeit, er, authorized copy. Games with cracks and hacks, poorly transcribed books, varying quality of cd/dvd rips...whatever.

The fact that these lesser quality products are "good enough" is all that matters to them. The problem is that no one seems to be wise enough to sell them these things for $3.99. They seem to thing 75% of the price of the physical version at (maybe) 20% of the consumer value and 1% of the manufacturing costs is a fair price and a good deal.

The market has demonstrated that they are...mistaken

Part of the "angle" on the ITMS was that it was better than free because it was LESS WORK than free and for a subset, time is worth money to them. This sells.

Producing content digitally is a CHOICE of the producers. Any informed person in this space, at least the ones I know under 40 (I'm almost there at 38) understand the RISKS as WELL AS the rewards of this path.

And those that cannot accept them either come to (like I did) or do something else.

There are guys in the game that are younger than i am that think MY VIEWS are still too rooted in the old ways...the thought of requiring the entry of a serial number seems a bit much after someone has already paid for the product, because doing so treats the customer as a criminal.

There is actually some logic to this. I'm still...studying this personally myself.

A lot of people seem more concerned about people that are not their customers than those that are...and I have been guilty of this myself, no doubt.

The truth is, for me anyway, that I cannot, as a person guilty of speeding for example, think of any fair punishment for anyone caught with a bootleg outside of causing them, the person, to pay for what they have or remove it...and this is totally unenforceable.

I mean I could do a run of discs, pay shipping, blah blah blah and none of these things will stop the problem. As a businessman, my desire is to maximize income AND profits and all I see my doing with a version of the MPAA relevant to me is me paying them fees to protect my interest from the unavoidable. The BSA has been around for ages. See where I am going with this?

There isn't a punishment in the world to change market forces outside of restrictions to uses of computers and personal freedoms I would not wish on my children. I don't WANT to be a part of an Information Cabaal that forces every machine connected to the internet to be registered, that have special chips and magic hardrives on them, connected via monitored pipes that are subject to random clandestine digital searches on the behalf of the Content Clan.

It is the only way to make what is by nature uncontainable constrained, it is totally artificial, it is beyond tempting for abuse and is a greater wrong then some a-hole with an unlicensed copy of something, that they aren't selling to other people.

Anyone that says otherwise is short-sighted at best and evil at worse to me.

All of us that do what we do do it because we chose to. As much as people preach about the "interlopers" needing to have some ethics and personal responsibility, so too do I think should we.

But it doesn't *really matter* what Mr. Kai thinks. What matters is what the people I wish to extract cash from does. Assuming I wish to still do such a thing in the world as it exist now. Since I don't find any alternatives more attractive...

12-10-2007, 07:35 PM	#205
mrkai Bit Wrangler Posts: 181 Karma: 415 Join Date: Oct 2007 Device: Sony PRS-505	After Steve decided to insult me, I kind of walked away from this but as i have been addressed directly, I shall add more commentary. First off: I am not an advocate of "free content"...I am merely an observer in the reality of the situation. Harry: The Actions of the RIAA and MPAA have had an effect Zero impact. Really. In fact, many in the US Congress have decided to take a closer look at these actions as they seem to constitute a level of heavyhanded punishment. The issue of property isn't irrelevant, it just isn't realistic. The only way to have exclusive distribution of digital products is to bring the customer to you in the brick and mortar world...something that has even less appeal. The notion that someone is getting away with something, too, is wrongheaded thinking. Anyone that acquires counterfeit digital product in my experience is getting a lesser product than the "original" legal counterfeit, er, authorized copy. Games with cracks and hacks, poorly transcribed books, varying quality of cd/dvd rips...whatever. The fact that these lesser quality products are "good enough" is all that matters to them. The problem is that no one seems to be wise enough to sell them these things for $3.99. They seem to thing 75% of the price of the physical version at (maybe) 20% of the consumer value and 1% of the manufacturing costs is a fair price and a good deal. The market has demonstrated that they are...mistaken Part of the "angle" on the ITMS was that it was better than free because it was LESS WORK than free and for a subset, time is worth money to them. This sells. Producing content digitally is a CHOICE of the producers. Any informed person in this space, at least the ones I know under 40 (I'm almost there at 38) understand the RISKS as WELL AS the rewards of this path. And those that cannot accept them either come to (like I did) or do something else. There are guys in the game that are younger than i am that think MY VIEWS are still too rooted in the old ways...the thought of requiring the entry of a serial number seems a bit much after someone has already paid for the product, because doing so treats the customer as a criminal. There is actually some logic to this. I'm still...studying this personally myself. A lot of people seem more concerned about people that are not their customers than those that are...and I have been guilty of this myself, no doubt. The truth is, for me anyway, that I cannot, as a person guilty of speeding for example, think of any fair punishment for anyone caught with a bootleg outside of causing them, the person, to pay for what they have or remove it...and this is totally unenforceable. I mean I could do a run of discs, pay shipping, blah blah blah and none of these things will stop the problem. As a businessman, my desire is to maximize income AND profits and all I see my doing with a version of the MPAA relevant to me is me paying them fees to protect my interest from the unavoidable. The BSA has been around for ages. See where I am going with this? There isn't a punishment in the world to change market forces outside of restrictions to uses of computers and personal freedoms I would not wish on my children. I don't WANT to be a part of an Information Cabaal that forces every machine connected to the internet to be registered, that have special chips and magic hardrives on them, connected via monitored pipes that are subject to random clandestine digital searches on the behalf of the Content Clan. It is the only way to make what is by nature uncontainable constrained, it is totally artificial, it is beyond tempting for abuse and is a greater wrong then some a-hole with an unlicensed copy of something, that they aren't selling to other people. Anyone that says otherwise is short-sighted at best and evil at worse to me. All of us that do what we do do it because we chose to. As much as people preach about the "interlopers" needing to have some ethics and personal responsibility, so too do I think should we. But it doesn't really matter what Mr. Kai thinks. What matters is what the people I wish to extract cash from does. Assuming I wish to still do such a thing in the world as it exist now. Since I don't find any alternatives more attractive...