TM: An alternative to DRM? Let's discuss.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Olympus

In another forum-thread it is mentioned that publishers calculate that people forward a p-book 6 to 10 times, newspapers are shared between neighbours, dvd-s are viewed in a family gathering, some tape and fastforward a tv show to skip commercials and there breaking the business-model based on advertising. Although your and my view on this topic differ very much, IMHO your piracy (= "not paying for the service by each individual that receives the benefits of a service") is part of the calculation of each realistic business model.

Actually, only the part about fast-forwarding TV shows to skip commercials messes up the advertising-based subsidy method. Group viewing and sharing of advertiser-subsidized media actually increases the "eyes per ad" that the advertiser pays for, which is what they want. Of course, in reality advertisers and producers adjust their prices to take into account these calculations.

And BTW, this is one of the reasons many DVDs are "rigged" to play the main content only after at least one viewing per DVD player of the advertising content (their way of defeating the "fast forward" trick).

As I said, there is no direct evidence that piracy leads to later purchases by pirates, or that pirates are effective promoters of material to paying customers. In general, piracy leads to the promotion of material to other pirates, and most likely, more piracy. They simply amount to net loss, just like theft. Net gains from popular venues (like Amazon and MobiPocket) and reviewed texts by known reviewers are much greater than any contribution pirates make.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

As I said, there is no direct evidence that piracy leads to later purchases by pirates, or that pirates are effective promoters of material to paying customers. In general, piracy leads to the promotion of material to other pirates, and most likely, more piracy. They simply amount to net loss, just like theft. Net gains from popular venues (like Amazon) and reviewed texts by known reviewers are much greater than any contribution pirates make.

You can say things but that does not make them true. Also there is no direct evidence for your claim in the quoted paragraph. If you have evidence please give it.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by tompe

You can say things but that does not make them true. Also there is no direct evidence for your claim in the quoted paragraph. If you have evidence please give it.

I might ask the same of you: Give me evidence that refutes it.

We'll start with this: Give me a list of all the authors that were discovered by pirates, whom pirates promoted ceaselessly, and are now famous and successful authors.

Give me any evidence that pirate promotion has significantly increased the sales of any already-established author.

Give me any evidence that a significant number of purchasers buying works reported being turned on to that author by the review of a pirate.

[JSWolf]

If I record commercial TV to the DVR, I do fast forward past the commercials (most of the time).

[Olympus]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Actually, only the part about fast-forwarding TV shows to skip commercials messes up the advertising-based subsidy method. Group viewing and sharing of advertiser-subsidized media actually increases the "eyes per ad" that the advertiser pays for, which is what they want. Of course, in reality advertisers and producers adjust their prices to take into account these calculations.

I wasn't talking about advertisements only: a shared/lent product isn't bought - thus is considered a pirated copy?
Should DRM allow "sharing" (like the Zune does) and mimik the current existing patterns people have developed with the physical products OR should we give the producer full control and maximum profit as one copy is fixed to one machine.

BTW Should removing DRM for your husband/wife be called piracy???

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I might ask the same of you: Give me evidence that refutes it.

The problem with this is that usually when someone makes a claim, he should bring some evidence to it; unless of course that person claims to be divinely inspired, or maybe inspired by historical forces

So, what about some evidence about piracy hurting authors...

Personally, I think that e-books are so insignificant right now in the grand scheme of publishing, that piracy is irrelevant either way.

[Olympus]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I might ask the same of you: Give me evidence that refutes it.

We'll start with this: Give me a list of all the authors that were discovered by pirates, whom pirates promoted ceaselessly, and are now famous and successful authors.

Give me any evidence that pirate promotion has significantly increased the sales of any already-established author.

Give me any evidence that a significant number of purchasers buying works reported being turned on to that author by the review of a pirate.

Heroes, Lost, Battle Star Galactica, 24, Desperate Housewives .... -> series that are pirated but became very popular

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I might ask the same of you: Give me evidence that refutes it.

We have given a lot of evidence that your claim "They simply amount to net loss, just like theft." is false. So what direct evidence do you have that this is true in the general case?

I also note that you continue to wrongly try to associate copyright infringement with theft.

http://www.tricklenews.com/pebble/de...021060000.html

[Taylor514ce]

@Olympus: Whoops, I think that's the classic ummm... what is the term? Backwards Induction Fallacy? Ispo something absurdum? Wracking my brain, here.

In any case, those shows are pirated BECAUSE they are popular. They aren't popular BECAUSE they were pirated.

Ipso cartus-equine a priori?

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

There is no data that backs up the idea that pirating works leads to the pirate's buying works by that artist later.

There is zero evidence that any author has gained hordes of fans thanks to their obtaining his pirated works.

There is no data that backs up the assertion that pirates go back and pay for the things they've pirated.

And there is no data that shows that people who download pirated works go out and buy other material based on those pirated works.

All of these points are obviously refuted by the example of Baen Books. Baen has demonstrated that readily available free content does encourage sales.

P.S. If you are going to nitpick because the content isn't illicit (and thus it isn't piracy), you will need to provide a creditable argument as to why a pirate would behave different from Baen's customer base. Most any argument you do provide cannot be applied to all pirates.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Taylor514ce

In any case, those shows are pirated BECAUSE they are popular. They aren't popular BECAUSE they were pirated.

But there popularity in a country were the show has not been broadcast can maybe be an example.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

So, what about some evidence about piracy hurting authors...

I'll cite Stephen King's "The Plant" project as a case where unpaid downloads resulted in the financial ruination of the work, causing it to be unfinished and shelved.

Strictly speaking, King was "asking" for payment, not forcing it up-front, so the works were not technically "pirated." But they were still downloaded in large numbers, with the expectation of payment following, and which did not surface in the required numbers. The result was killing the project, which also served to sour King's rep with many of his fans. I daresay that was not a positive outcome for King.

[tompe]

I also think that the DVD sale of Buffy would never have been so big if people had not watched the show by downloading.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I'll cite Stephen King's "The Plant" project as a case where unpaid downloads resulted in the financial ruination of the work, causing it to be unfinished and shelved.

And how much money did King loose? He earned more money doing an unfinished work than most authors earn for a complete book. Your example is totally non convincing as has been explained in previous threads.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I'll cite Stephen King's "The Plant" project as a case where unpaid downloads resulted in the financial ruination of the work, causing it to be unfinished and shelved.

Strictly speaking, King was "asking" for payment, not forcing it up-front, so the works were not technically "pirated." But they were still downloaded in large numbers, with the expectation of payment following, and which did not surface in the required numbers. The result was killing the project, which also served to sour King's rep with many of his fans. I daresay that was not a positive outcome for King.

I would love to have a "failure" that netted me over $400k!

That's not a good example. It failed because it was poorly designed. If I remember correctly, he required payment from a certain percentage of downloads. Any halfway decent script-kiddie could screw with the download count by downloading a few million copies.