Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa
I totally agree. Folks get so concerned with keeping these people from having the content for free (even though they likely never use it) that they punish all the people who are happy to pay a reasonable price and do a reasonable amount of work for it.
|
True... but this is business nature, the idea being to shame the thieves for ruining the ride for everyone, and simultaneously to encourage honest people to "blow the whistle" on violators, so they can be dealt with... all the while requiring no special effort on their behalf.
It reminds me of some frustrating moments on our Metro subway: Occasionally, a car can get so stuffed with people that the operators cannot close the doors. Verbal warnings are issued by the driver, including: "If this car cannot be secured, this entire train will be taken out of service."
With a warning like that, you'd think the people on the train might take action to tell crowders to get off. Yet despite the warning, people continue to press in, and people already in do not force them back out as they need to... with the result that the car is declared out of service, everyone on every car must exit, and the train leaves (becoming an absolutely empty car for the next stop).
And now people from that emptied train... including those who boarded early, and did not contribute to the problem... must crowd onto the next train, like the rest of the ne'er-do-wells.
For businesses, knee-jerk reactions to small threats is considered the easy way to deal with the problem. A tougher way would be to station guards at every car, with the authority to block boardres and even yank crowders out, so the car can function. But no one likes to see guards... they'd like to see everything function as it should, on its own, in their nice little idealized world. So the lazy business lets them have what they want, and you get over-reaction to small threats.
In most transactions, consumer cooperation is as important as seller cooperation. Consumers have to agree to abide the seller's rules, and not to make it easy for others to steal from the seller (and ruin the ride). That often means putting up with some security, or becoming part of the security... not aiding thieves.
The e-book industry is having a hard time hitting that security point, because the bulk of e-book consumers want no security, and they do not want to "rat out" darknet users or cooperate with steps that would hinder the darknet's efficiency. Historically, markets like this can't function, because the seller eventually gives up and goes away (usually to a more reasonable market).
the iTunes system demonstrates a system where consumers, accepting some security (DRM), have allowed a seller to prosper, while keeping the damage done by thieves to a perceived minimum. That's why we keep coming back to it as an example, and it's a good one. It takes realistic market forces into account, and applies security at an effective level to ensure satisfied customers and profitable business.
When e-book customers decide the security applied by sellers is acceptable to them, they will buy, and sellers will not lose so much sleep over perceived or actual losses.
(Came out a bit long, didn't it? Thus endeth the Saturday morning lecture.)