Quote:
Originally Posted by Ankh
There are a couple of problems with that "better" assessment.
First of all, the current publishing infrastructure primarily pushes the books that can sell in as many copies as possible. If one looks at the overall (pbook) output of the publishing industry, that's the essence of "better" at this moment of time.
Well, one can see books as goods created for the market, I have no problems with that. But if books are goods, and market is driving their prices down, then the conclusion is rather easy. The market does not recognize the value of offered goods. There is competition, obviously. Video games? TV?
Now, if books are NOT (only) goods destined for the market, we enter the realm of authorities. Who is to define universal cultural values? Publishing industry cadre?
The system is not torn down, it is imploding. I can not predict what will be the end result of this change, but one thing is certain, status quo is untenable.
Will the price of the digital goods go all the way down to zero or not is of secondary concern, IMHO.
|
I totally agree and this is why I have repeatedly stated I am not arguing for the old ways or the status quo.
I am just against the idea that the consumer's rights should trump all else. I am against the idea that the creator should simply accept that consumers can get their work for free and so should therefore be willing to take whatever payment the consumer wants to give if anything at all.
Why should that be the attitude simply because we live in a digital world? Why should the creator have no rights and be obligated to go cap in hand to the audience?
Take sculpture for example. A sculptor creates a work of art out of a piece of wood. Now the piece of wood has little to no inherent value, you can go get wood from anywhere. It is the artistic effort that has gone into the creation that gives it the worth as a piece of art. Should the sculptor be obligated to give it away for whatever price joe bloggs down the street feels like paying or allow joe bloggs to simply take it away for free if they like? I would argue not. So why should it be any different with a book?
This attitude of "I have a right to access your work for free so take whatever I feel like giving you in return" is just as unsustainable as the current paradigm. It is simply more appealing to the consumer because they are the ones with the power now.
Cheers,
PKFFW