Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
Of course any drain on profits is more than made up by the social benefit of having more things out there and available. I mean sure there are certain types out there who want to rape the pocketbooks of anyone who sees a printed word, on screen or elsewhere and doesn't instantly empty their wallet on the spot and then call them thieves to boot but sensible people would of course see that a handful less sales isn't the end of the world and a few more eyeballs on the books beats the hell out of being unknown. And, anyone interested in a legacy later on or just one who switches publishers might like some DRMless copies floating around, they may even download one themselves to save time and energy.
Think of it as the making lemonade scenario. It has to be better than just sucking on lemons but maybe some people prefer that, I dunno.
|
First let me say that I have absolutely no financial interests here (the opposite, I have to buy books!). But this offends my sense of justice. Who gives you the right to decide whose wallet is more "worthy"? Why should the downloader -- who has done nothing for society -- get a free ride and deprive the writer -- who is actually contributing something -- of what is rightfully his?
And why should society support those free loaders? Why is a handful of lost sales "no problem" but a downloader contributing a few bucks to put food on the table for those that provide his enjoyment is so difficult? Or, if the downloader thinks it is too expensive, why can't he just stay away?
The whole matter makes even less sense when you consider that if 10 people download the same book then each would only have to pay one time, but the author theoretically (!) loses 10 sales!