|
> No DRM, fair use policy, etc etc. I think it will
> come one day. One thing that is hampering its' introduction
> though, is the idea that anyone should be allowed to
> upload any file they want for the entire internet
> connected world to access for free.
If there is evidence that DRM, geo-restrictions, device lock-ins, delayed releases and hardcover-level pricing has caused less people to upload, can you point me to your sources? Common sense suggests the opposite is true.
> Until people get that idea out of their heads and replace
> it with the idea that paying a reasonable fee for digital
> media is ok and fair, authors and publishers will continue
> to drag the chain.
So, until "authors and publishers" somehow measure that the people on internet now "have ideas out of their heads", "people on the internet" should excercise their right to not consume content - as both downloading from darknet and paying for DRM-infested content are systemically harmful and therefore - immoral.
Downloading from darknet is illegal - however, unless it is actually possible for me to somehow pay for a product that is in usable format, it is impossible for me to cause economic harm to the author that way.
Paying for DRM-ed content and then removing ot for it to be useful, is also illegal -and- is a signal to the industry that hey - the idiots are actually paying for this - this DRM-thingy must be good!
Paying for DRM-ed content and then failing to remove the DRM is stupid as it restricts me to some arbitrary subset of available hardware. Which in turn restricts me to some arbitrary subset of content. AND is for all I know, also illegal, as the industry standard contracts restrict sales to redhead residents of Alaska, or some such.
If the only legal way for a customer to please your industry is not to buy from you at all, then people getting your stuff for free is hardly your most damaging problem.
> It's a two way street and requires both parties to change
Realistically, the change is going towards more darknet, with every passing year. Baen has been doing more or less the right thing for 10 years now - noone in the anglo-american publishing industry has followed. Because of content-hardware lock-ins, the hardware business is not competitive enough and develops slowly. Because of expensive readers, horror stories about DRM and confusion about formats, shifting from paper-based tech is slow as hell. This is exactly how the content industry likes it - to preserve status quo. Blaming the non-change on pirates is justification, nothing more.
Paradoxically, from consumer point of view, a period of truly rampant piracy might actually be a good thing. Eventually the publishing establishment will get hit in their pockets hard enough to force them to out-compete the pirates. As far as I can tell, this is what happened in russia. From consumer perspective - with stellar success, not sure how happy the authors are with it, but unlike before - they are getting paid.
I suppose, the key point of this whole rant is: "free" is -not- the only significant reason for customers to turn to darknet.
|