EU vice-president: Copyright legislation is “pushing people to steal”

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by darryl

The mechanism that takes care of the differences in disposable income in poorer countries now is piracy, not publishing.

No, it's not. Most publishers supply low-cost editions of book to countries such as India. That would instantly stop if anyone could buy them.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by darryl

The mechanism that takes care of the differences in disposable income in poorer countries now is piracy, not publishing.

Right.
So single world pricing will main the poorer countries won't get legal versions and will resort to piracy.

With higher licensing prices to make up for the loss of that revenue leading to increased piracy in the developed world, everybody loses.

Fortunately, the EU effort (whatever it leads to, if anything) will only apply within the EU so the damage will be limited to EU-produced content.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Right.
So single world pricing will main the poorer countries won't get legal versions and will resort to piracy.

With higher licensing prices to make up for the loss of that revenue leading to increased piracy in the developed world, everybody loses.

Fortunately, the EU effort (whatever it leads to, if anything) will only apply within the EU so the damage will be limited to EU-produced content.

I just checked Amazon India where "The Girl on the Train" is selling for 299.50 rupees. which converts to about $US4.70. Amazon currently want $6.99 in te US. The price in India is lower, but not so much lower as to cater for the impoverished. Undeveloped countries quite often have a middle class which, although small in percentage terms, is larger than the whole population of some more developed countries. Prices appear to be set to sell to this relatively affluent middle class, not to the much larger mass of impoverished who anecdotally read pirate versions on their cellphones. Single world pricing will probably make little difference to this situation.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by darryl

I just checked Amazon India where "The Girl on the Train" is selling for 299.50 rupees. which converts to about $US4.70. Amazon currently want $6.99 in te US. The price in India is lower, but not so much lower as to cater for the impoverished. Undeveloped countries quite often have a middle class which, although small in percentage terms, is larger than the whole population of some more developed countries. Prices appear to be set to sell to this relatively affluent middle class, not to the much larger mass of impoverished who anecdotally read pirate versions on their cellphones. Single world pricing will probably make little difference to this situation.

Simple currency conversion does't work to measure affordability.

http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...for-a-big-mac/

Going by the Big Mac index ($1.89 in India buys $4.79 of hamburger in US terms) the real cost of the ebook in earning power is over US$12 or about double the US.
That is not cheaper pricing.

Anything that drives pricing higher isn't going to move sales down market.

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Where we disagree is that I don't think you have some automatic "right" to have access to something like a TV show. If a show isn't available in your country there's generally a way around it - eg you can wait until it comes out on DVD in its country of origin, and then buy the DVD.

I'm not talking about that. I want to buy a book. It is not available in my country. But I can't buy it the UK where it is available, because of that stupid restriction. Even though there is NO publisher who publishes it in English in my country. So, what do you do? Wait till the end of time for that product to finally become available in your country? I'm not angelic enough to wait for that and will either lie about my location or go to the dark side.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

I'm not talking about that. I want to buy a book. It is not available in my country. But I can't buy it the UK where it is available, because of that stupid restriction. Even though there is NO publisher who publishes it in English in my country. So, what do you do? Wait till the end of time for that product to finally become available in your country? I'm not angelic enough to wait for that and will either lie about my location or go to the dark side.

You could buy it as a paper book. There are no restrictions on paper book sales.

[latepaul]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You misunderstand me. Of course these are copyrighted works, but copyright law is not the reason for georestrictions; such restrictions are simply down to the terms of distribution contracts. Changing copyright law would have absolutely no impact on such contracts.

Copyright law is the basis on which the contracts are made. Copyright-derived rights are the literally what the contracts concern. Hence how you can say changing copyright law would have no impact baffles me.

In any case, even if you disagree that this is related to copyright at all, the title of the thread is still appropriate because Mr Ansip did in fact frame the issue in terms of copyright.

Listen to him if you don't believe me.

[Alpha o]

Some geoblocking is just plain dumb. Like MLB in the US. If your team is in a certain division, you can't see the other teams in the same division on MLB on Roku. Your local team wants your fanny in the seats. That I understand. But I can't fly to where my team plays (in the same division, but 1,000 miles away) - expensive. You can get a subscription to a service in the UK anyway that allows you to see all games live. Not in the US.

Time zone geoblocking? Our time zones are as big as some of the EU countries.
Movie is released on the East coast, everyone can find it on the internet If the movie stinks and that is posted before movie released on West coast - that hurts business.
People record on cell phones or text during movie that it stinks.

Political geoblocking for any reason on either the seller or the receivers?

Financial geoblocking? The seller of the product or service does not agree with the country's terms for release?

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You could buy it as a paper book. There are no restrictions on paper book sales.

Then I'd buy the paper book and have to scan it myself... Besides, why can I buy the paper book but not the digital book? I don't suffer fools gladly and refuse to help them.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Then I'd buy the paper book and have to scan it myself... Besides, why can I buy the paper book but not the digital book? I don't suffer fools gladly and refuse to help them.

<shrug>

You asked how you could buy it. I told you.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Simple currency conversion does't work to measure affordability.

http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...for-a-big-mac/

Going by the Big Mac index ($1.89 in India buys $4.79 of hamburger in US terms) the real cost of the ebook in earning power is over US$12 or about double the US.
That is not cheaper pricing.

Anything that drives pricing higher isn't going to move sales down market.

That is my point, or at least one of them. Sales are already "up market" in India and are likely to stay that way under the existing system. If a "world price" did in fact turn out to be a higher price for books in India I suspect it would make little difference to the segment of the market able to purchase books there. It would be interesting to see at least some realistic modelling, but if such does exist I doubt it is public. It seems a very poor reason for allowing Publishers to hold the world to ransom.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by darryl

That is my point, or at least one of them. Sales are already "up market" in India and are likely to stay that way under the existing system. If a "world price" did in fact turn out to be a higher price for books in India I suspect it would make little difference to the segment of the market able to purchase books there. It would be interesting to see at least some realistic modelling, but if such does exist I doubt it is public. It seems a very poor reason for allowing Publishers to hold the world to ransom.

Don't you think you're exaggerating just a little? Rights-holders have an absolute right to decide who to sell distribution rights to, and in what territories. Nobody's being held to ransom. It's generally the decision of the author, not the publisher, to decide to sell rights to different publishers in different counties, because they can make significantly more money that way. Blame the author, not the publisher.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by darryl

The mechanism that takes care of the differences in disposable income in poorer countries now is piracy, not publishing.

+1. Most of the poorer countries either don't honor copyright or have legal restrictions that are ignored by everyone. It's been that way for years. It's very easy to buy pirated versions of all sorts of things in most poor countries.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Don't you think you're exaggerating just a little? Rights-holders have an absolute right to decide who to sell distribution rights to, and in what territories. Nobody's being held to ransom. It's generally the decision of the author, not the publisher, to decide to sell rights to different publishers in different counties, because they can make significantly more money that way. Blame the author, not the publisher.

Actually, I believe that it's a carry over from the old days before all the consolidation of the publishers. Much of the business practice in the publishing world is a carry over from the old days and is done that way because that's the way we have always done it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Actually, I believe that it's a carry over from the old days before all the consolidation of the publishers.

No, it's because the author makes more money that way. Sell to two publishers and you get two advances. Most books do not earn back more than their advance, so the advance is the author's sole revenue from the book.