Paul Coelho on Piracy and Publishing

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

I am just afraid that would happen with a book - takes so much longer to consume it. And if it is bad do you just read it in the hope that it will get better?

For every book I read, there tend to be several I start. This is a big reason why I have rarely bought books, except for reference.

Your state arguably has the best public library system in the US. Use of libraries generates revenue for authors in several ways. For one, the more books being borrowed, the better a case the libraries can make to buy more. For another, if a patron wants the book you are reading (whether eBook or paper), and is impatient, he or she may choose to purchase it.

Book piracy likely reduces library borrowing. That in itself hurts authors.

And yes, I know that the situation is different in Russia and China. These comments apply to countries with extensive freedom to read and developed public library systems.

[anamardoll]

Ugh. Skyline. Seconded.

Pretty movie, but such a letdown.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by stonetools

since the prevailing meme here is that piracy is OK

Can there be a meme that is not prevailing? Or perhaps you don't know what a meme is?

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by stonetools

G

It's a nice anecdote. Ain't data, though.
Gotta balance that against authors who believe that they lost sales through piracy . They don't get quoted on this website, since the prevailing meme here is that piracy is OK, but they are out there.

So, you complain that the Gaiman quote wasn't data, and then say we need to look at other anecdotes? That aside, I get what you mean, anecdotes are interesting but you can only draw so much from them. What we need is hard data, maybe presented by a research firm that isn't attached to a media organization. Oh wait, that exists.

Canada's International Development Research Centre conducted years of of independent investigation in six emerging economies, and concluded in a 442 page report that piracy is chiefly a product of a market failure, not a legal one. There's a summary here, and a few quotes here (from the summary):

While setting the record straight on piracy myths is valuable, the report's most important contribution comes from chronicling how piracy is primarily a function of market failure. In many developing countries, there are few meaningful legal distribution channels for media products. The report notes “the pirate market cannot be said to compete with legal sales or generate losses for industry. At the low end of the socioeconomic ladder where such distribution gaps are common, piracy often simply is the market.”

Even in those jurisdictions where there are legal distribution channels, pricing renders many products unaffordable for the vast majority of the population. Foreign rights holders are often more concerned with preserving high prices in developed countries, rather than actively trying to engage the local population with reasonably-priced access. These strategies may maximize profits globally, but they also serve to facilitate pirate markets in many developed countries.

[taosaur]

From a tangentially related discussion at Wired (interview w/ photographer Paul Shambroom):

I would never say how anyone – especially artists – should respond to anything. You follow your own nose.

I think if you’re afraid of it you’re going to be an unhappy person. In the brief history of photography, 175 years or so, a lot of it has been going out someplace and bringing back your image as a trophy, as a spoil or as a treasure and I think those days are ending pretty quickly.

Emphasis mine. http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2012/02...ing-them/all/1

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

What realistically is the harm done to the obscure author? If his/her book stays hidden with other few thousand books and never gets read, no lost revenue. And who can realistically read 2000 books without spending years and years of reading (and that is if you read ALOT). So it is just a huge library. If that one obscure author has a real nice cover, or name, or something, it might stand out, get noticed (to that person looking through it), and will get read. And quite possible someone that looked for unknown authors and reads them that are inside thousands of other, possibly already more popular, then that author has a new fan. If you downloaded that huge library for the sole purpose of having different books available (again you cannot read em all anyway) then you might end up buying the, say, 10 books you really liked.

I agree that there is probably not much harm done to the obscure author either.

I just don't think he will be helped much, even if one in 100,000 people do look at the 1,998 books that came with the books they actually wanted to pirate. Being pirated is just not really a viable way to escape obscurity. And I'm not sure many authors make that specific argument.

Instead, I think the more viable (and more common) argument is that: (1) obscurity is your biggest problem; (2) the best way of overcoming obscurity may be by doing things that make piracy easier (giving books away, selling them cheaply, not using DRM, distributing by torrent); and (3) the exposure you will get will benefit you more than taking significant steps to prevent piracy would.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

I agree that there is probably not much harm done to the obscure author either.

I just don't think he will be helped much, even if one in 100,000 people do look at the 1,998 books that came with the books they actually wanted to pirate. Being pirated is just not really a viable way to escape obscurity. And I'm not sure many authors make that specific argument.

Instead, I think the more viable (and more common) argument is that: (1) obscurity is your biggest problem; (2) the best way of overcoming obscurity may be by doing things that make piracy easier (giving books away, selling them cheaply, not using DRM, distributing by torrent); and (3) the exposure you will get will benefit you more than taking significant steps to prevent piracy would.

I can understand this part, but what is disconcerting to me is that some smaller authors and artists like Colleen Doran have specifically asked sites and individuals to honor their wishes not to be pirated, and have been roundly ignored. Very rarely in these discussions of piracy do we talk about what it means if we're at a point where people can't do something so basic as take things without paying.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Instead, I think the more viable (and more common) argument is that: (1) obscurity is your biggest problem; (2) the best way of overcoming obscurity may be by doing things that make piracy easier (giving books away, selling them cheaply, not using DRM, distributing by torrent); and (3) the exposure you will get will benefit you more than taking significant steps to prevent piracy would.

It hasn't helped me any... people just fall back on the "he's unknown, so he must suck" argument and ignore my work anyway.

Originally Posted by sbroome

I can understand this part, but what is disconcerting to me is that some smaller authors and artists like Colleen Doran have specifically asked sites and individuals to honor their wishes not to be pirated, and have been roundly ignored. Very rarely in these discussions of piracy do we talk about what it means if we're at a point where people can't do something so basic as take things without paying.

I've tried to broach the subject many times, and generally get thrubbed for my trouble.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by sbroome

I can understand this part, but what is disconcerting to me is that some smaller authors and artists like Colleen Doran have specifically asked sites and individuals to honor their wishes not to be pirated, and have been roundly ignored. Very rarely in these discussions of piracy do we talk about what it means if we're at a point where people can't do something so basic as take things without paying.

I agree with that. Thank you for bringing this side up as well. Have not come across any of the smaller authors myself while looking through my library - mainly because I have not started browsing yet until my current TBR list is done.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by sbroome

I can understand this part, but what is disconcerting to me is that some smaller authors and artists like Colleen Doran have specifically asked sites and individuals to honor their wishes not to be pirated, and have been roundly ignored. Very rarely in these discussions of piracy do we talk about what it means if we're at a point where people can't do something so basic as take things without paying.

It is coming down to the creator asking the reader to please pay before reading, and the reader telling the creator they would like to read before paying.

For this sort of thing we just have to go with the flow as it were. Asking someone to not do something is harder than not asking them. It is easier to read than pay. All you have to do is make paying and reading equally easy.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

It hasn't helped me any... people just fall back on the "he's unknown, so he must suck" argument and ignore my work anyway.



I've tried to broach the subject many times, and generally get thrubbed for my trouble.

To be honest your saying I know I am good, don't need to be reassured threw me off for a while. Until this post when you point to specific books instead of all of them at once. I decided to check the first link, read the excerpt - most of it anyway, and knew the book is worth my time. Needless to say that I did not make it to the 2nd book in that post since I hope all them are beeing delivered soon.

By the way nice job on throwing such a large bone in your sample chapters - enough to get a feel for the book but not enough to reveal all your tricks.

[Beryll Snyder]

Originally Posted by azazel1024

Yeah, I don't think he is taking the stance that things SHOULD be pirated or that people shouldn't be annoyed that their stuff is pirated. I believe he is pointing out that the reality is, that in general, artistic works do better when they are pirated a lot.

Of course there is a least a bit of chicken and the egg case where it is often hard to tell if pirating in part led to somethings rise in popularity and increased sales through original or derivative formats or if the work was becoming popular on its own, which drove high levels of pirating.

What exactly does "doing better" mean? More distribution, more income, more reputation?
His opinion is as irrational as his books. Why doesn't he go all the way and spreads his production freely? He surely has made enough money - more than most authors can even wish for.
As things stand I consider this a marketing trick ...

[AlexGrama]

In my opinion, this is rubbish and uncalled for because a lot of people have already been pirating his and everyone's work. He's trying the reverse psychology concept, indirectly forcing us to buy his books. I have a great respect for him because some of his books literally changed the flow of my thoughts but this is degrading.

[Beryll Snyder]

Originally Posted by AlexGrama

In my opinion, this is rubbish and uncalled for because a lot of people have already been pirating his and everyone's work. He's trying the reverse psychology concept, indirectly forcing us to buy his books. I have a great respect for him because some of his books literally changed the flow of my thoughts but this is degrading.

Could you be a little more precise?
Reverse psychology, hey? He seems to know his clientele well - wouldn't work on everyone ...

[AlexGrama]

I was referring to the idea of downloading the book and after that buying it because of its awesomeness. IMO, this is just a scam. If we would come up with an experiment which would consist in not buying any of his books for one or two months, you will rapidly notice a change in his mind. Why? Because with no profit, the idea of illegal downloading it's not so appealing.

Of course, this is my opinion. Maybe and certainly I'm talking nonsense.