Quote:
Originally Posted by PKFFW
I never said every downloaded copy equals a product not purchased. I said the vast majority do and that is true when it comes to ebooks.
The studies have all been done in areas where the market place has adapted to the digital age. Yes, music downloaders very likely go out and buy some music after downloading because the market place has adapted and made buying downloaded music cheap and easily accomplished. The ebook market place, for good or ill, has not, so to suggest that most ebook downloaders go out and buy a legit copy is ridiculous when the number one reason most often given for downloading illegal copies of ebooks is because they cost too much to buy legitamately.
As for the reason for downloading, I only make the claim most do it because they don't want to pay for it because that is the number one reason given. Most people freely admit they would be happy to legally purchase a copy of an ebook if they were cheaper. Ergo, their reason for not purchasing it is because they do not want to pay the asking price. Not to mention the fact that whatever the reason(and I doubt the majority do it to "protest the system" or geographical unavailability) the end result is the same.
So what you are saying is once a book is published the author has no rights and shouldn't expect any? If he chooses to publish only in paper form then who cares, it is your god given right to go and scan a copy and upload it to a server so anyone who wants a copy can have it and the author should just accept that? Or if he epublishes he should just accept the fact that again it is your god given right to upload it to a server so many thousands of people around the world can have a copy without any sort of compensation to the author? What about changing the book? Not fan-fiction mind you but actually changing the book and then distributing it? Is that ok too? What about simple plagarism? It's up to the audience to do what they like isn't it? And on a moral scale plagarism probably falls below grand theft auto, assault and battery and many other things so I guess it's ok by some people's logic. Should I be able to simply put my name to it? Where do you draw the line?
Again I wonder if your thoughts will change should you ever be published?
Cheers,
PKFFW
|
Well I'll answer your last question first, if I may. I no longer seek publication by the old and frankly, unfair, methods. Any control I have over the product will be granted by the public if they adhere to the lenient Creative Commons license I chose to publish myself under. What they then do with it, is up to them. I'd hope that nobody would try to make money off my work, as that's not my intention, and I trust the public to adhere to the Creative Commons licensing which allows them to freely share, redistribute, and even create derivative works from my original. My motivation is not for-profit, but because I have a desire and a want to write. If I had to pay a monthly fee to be allowed to write, I would do so.
I don't doubt that we'll see, in time, fan-edited versions of books as we have seen fan edited versions of Star Wars (Lucas didn't bother suing over this by the way). What I'm actually saying is that it's a futile endeavour to try and control your work after publication. Of course you can pursue those trying to make money off your work, I don't think there's any questions about that. But when it comes to file-sharing then you'd be cutting your own throat if you try and restrict the work with such archaic and useless schemes as DRM. That is why the old system is in such dire need of fixing. You can no more restrict a digital copy than you can retrieve a stick of hay out of a massive stack of needles. Ignoring that reality is a sure-fire way to disappointment.
If the product costs too much, as you say, then the price must come down to attract a market. Or, as a lot of authors are doing, you pay what 'you think' the product is worth, therefore cutting out the middlemen altogether and giving the author maximum profit from his work. Of course some people won't pay, but they wouldn't pay anyway, so nothing is lost, but a reader might be gained. It's a trade off. You either accept what's happening and join the people, or try to force the old methods into the new digital age and lose readers, money and everything else in the process.
I suppose I have more trust in people than you, but I think authors are going to come out of this age a lot better off than they've ever been before. I believe we're going to see more people reading, and reading more diversely because their culture is no longer shackled and locked by the old ways.