Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
The problem is in discussing financial issues in moralistic terms... you're right, it clearly doesn't work. Discussing the issues as moral absolutes isn't working: DRM is not the equivalent to an H-bomb; Pirates are not the Sons of Satan; Authors are not idealistic saints.
The only way to deal with financial loss is to take financial steps (including laws that support the financial steps). Appealing to the consumer's morality is pointless, because it has already been demonstrated that money trumps morality in the majority of consumers' minds.
I think copyright concerns can be upheld in a digital economy. I think that financial steps will accomplish that, by making it financially worth the while of the majority (consumers and creators) to support the copyright-based system. If it does not happen, it will only be because the financial system developed some other sales method that the majority will consider in their best interests to support.
|
I think the biggest problem *against* full-compliance is money. No, not the money in the consumers' pockets, but the money that represents what informed consumers consider to be a "reasonable" price for an ebook that will generate an "adequate" profit to the publisher and royalty to the author. We all know that the "retail" costs for an ebook are far lower than that of a dead-tree. And the ebook doesn't have the costs associated with printing, storage and distribution. So when a publisher releases a new title in dead-tree but then also releases it in ebook - for trade or hardcover price - well, the average user decides it's not a "reasonable" deal.
Then when months go by and the publisher is still charging HC prices, the consumer gets frustrated and 'darknets' it. End result, a lost ebook sale. Had the publisher truly understood market forces, the publisher would have either released the ebook at mmpb prices initially, or would have shortened the time between initial hc pricing and mmpb pricing.
But then, we've already seen how publishers continue to insist upon 1800's marketing and publishing methods in the face of a 2000's marketplace.
Derek