Quote:
Originally Posted by PKFFW
A few points rather than quoting and responding to three pages.........
1: Copyright - I agree it goes way to far. Personally I think until death is right. Why should an author not retain ownership of his creation at least until he dies?
2: Digital media is valueless - I think most people advocating this idea are playing a semantics game. We can all agree that the value is in the reading correct? Well how else are you going to get that value except by reading the digital copy? So does the digital copy really have no value or are people just fixating on that in order to justify their own position?
So many here have argued that the "old ways" aren't going to work in this new digital age. I find it odd then that these same people continue to use an "old model" way of assigning value to something. That is they keep using the idea of supply and demand to suggest that since digital media has limitless supply then it has no value.
Well if we are looking to throw out the old ways, lets throw them all out. Lets stop playing semantics and admit that digital media does have a value. It's value is in being the medium by which the content is accessed. Lets try to work out a way to assigning a fair value to this rather than sticking to the old ways when it comes to value because they support our desire for free content.
ficbot mentioned paying a set fee for access to all digital media. Maybe that will work, who knows. I can guarantee you this though, it will only work if we get past this idea of digital media being valueless. Once someone assigns zero value to something they will not pay anything for it, simple as that.
3: Piracy et al - Piracy(or "file-sharing" if that suits you better) is generally done for no other reason than people want to access the work for free or at the very least not at the price the author/publisher is asking. Dress it up and justify it however you like but that is what it comes down to. Now, at the moment piracy is not a big deal. Few people, as a percentage of the reading public, engage in it really. Further to that, if ebooks were priced more "fairly" and came with full ownership(like a pbook and without DRM) I would say even less people would engage in piracy. As has been mentioned, the vast majority of people do want to act in a sane, rational and fair manner and pay a reasonable and fair price for what they want.
So what's the problem? Well that is how it operates now but is unlikely to stay that way in the future. As many have argued here, even the iTunes model is unlikely to be sustainable. Why is that? Because people view digital content as having zero value. Nobody is willing to pay money for something of zero value. Couple that with piracy becoming easier and more accessible in the future and we will see less and less people paying a "fair" price regardless of the DRM issues and whatever else is used to justify piracy now. And that will come about because people keep fixating on the idea of digital media being valueless as a way of justifying their desire to not have to pay for what they want.
4: Authors getting paid for writing - Yes, only a few ever make their living from writing. Does that mean all authors should not expect any payment for their writing? Seems so many on here are quick to confuse the desire to be paid for their writing with wanting to make squillions of dollars and live the high life from their writing.
Just because an author enjoys what they do(or should anyway) doesn't mean the public should have the right to access their works for free if that is not the authors intent. Maybe the author will never sell enough copies of their work to make a living from it but that does not mean they should just give it away for free. I think those that keep bringing up the "making a living from writing" are selling everyone a dummy. I believe they are intentionally confusing the issue as another way of supporting their point of view.
The long and the short of it is that an author has created something and it is their right to ask for a fair payment for it before someone has the right to access it. If the audience doesn't want to read it or the asking price is too high then they can simply not buy it. Maybe the author will make a living from it and maybe they wont but that isn't the issue. The issue is that it is the authors right to ask for payment and it is not the audience's right to go and access the work for free if they want to. And arguing that this is the reality, that people do just go pirate it if they want it and that the authors should just deal with it is no different to saying might makes right. The might of the public makes it right to do whatever they want. No, it doesn't make it right.
Cheers,
PKFFW
|
1. Copyright: I agree with you. Life is enough.
Besides,
copyright is not at all the only way to reward authors, despite the fact most people here thinks so.
2. Digital "media" has a value, OK. It's digtal "copy" which does not. To fully get out of the "old model" you have to erase the whole idea of "copy". It's not a matter of supply and demand. It's just the fact that "copies" do not exist.
I pay for media. I pay my computer, my connection, my ebook reader, the elecrtical power to keep them going... Digital media has definitely a value and it's not free at all.
OTOH, digital copy is valueless. How much do you pay for the "Copy" you create in RAM when you open your book? Are you stealing from the author?
The value is mostly in the content, and then in the medium, like it always have been. In this "new model", a "copy" does not correspond to a "new instance of the medium".
3. Piracy. In Italy we have:
Total amount of legal ebook novels: 0
Total amount of pirated e-novels: 30.000 and counting.
Is price the only driver toward piracy?
Let's face it: pirated ebooks are far more, better formatted, more usable and more easily available than legal ones. They're offering more for less. And pirates work hard to do it. They spend hours in scanning, formatting and proofreading...
4. Authors: nobody should expect to be paid just for having put some words on a page. I did it, and the crap I wrote wasn't published, and I din't make a penny. Will you pay me? I don't think so.
Authors have to be paid, as long as they do a good job. The better the writing, the higher the reward. That would be fair!
As of now, bad authors in bad TV shows make more money than good authors with good blogs...
So, I'm completely in favour of a meritocratic reward method.
