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

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by darryl

We should do what we can, legally, to change them. Because they are very bad laws.

I repeat the question I asked earlier: what are you proposing should be done? Abolishing single-country or regional distribution contracts?

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by Barcey

Maybe but what he's saying is that 68% of the people are doing it (for video) so apparently you're in the minority. He's saying that the solution is to fix the broken business model rather than creating tougher laws to fix 68% of the population.

Videos offers are full of drm. That's why I don't buy.

I would like to rent video, but there "you're in France, why would you want an other languages than France"
Wanted to watch hunger games, can't find somewhere with the original version.

We're in 2015. There is that thing called Internet. People's expectations have changed. They don't want to wait for dubbing.
But this realisation didn't reach the majors.
To sell, you need to provide the customer with what he wants. Not what you think he wants.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I repeat the question I asked earlier: what are you proposing should be done? Abolishing single-country or regional distribution contracts?

No need to do that, Harry, buy why on earth not The law would simply make it clear that circumvention of geographic restrictions was allowable, and void any relevant contractual terms accordingly. I have already seen such measures proposed. Geographic restrictions on the internet are simply not feasible. They are an anachronism caused by rights holders trying to maintain the status quo business model.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by darryl

No need to do that, Harry, buy why on earth not The law would simply make it clear that circumvention of geographic restrictions was allowable, and void any relevant contractual terms accordingly. I have already seen such measures proposed. Geographic restrictions on the internet are simply not feasible. They are an anachronism caused by rights holders trying to maintain the status quo business model.

The result of that would be much higher prices for the consumer. Every distributor would have to buy world-wide distribution rights, and the potential increase in sales would almost certainly not cover those additional costs, which would inevitably be passed on to the consumer. Are you willing to pay double or triple the existing price?

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by darryl

No need to do that, Harry, buy why on earth not The law would simply make it clear that circumvention of geographic restrictions was allowable, and void any relevant contractual terms accordingly. I have already seen such measures proposed. Geographic restrictions on the internet are simply not feasible. They are an anachronism caused by rights holders trying to maintain the status quo business model.

To be more exact geographic restrictions are an attempt to get as much money as possible (Which is fine, this is a business not a public service)

If you outlaw geo-restrictions then poorer countries will not get any books/shows at all because people would just buy/stream it from India or somewhere at a cost of next to nothing due to the cost of living differences.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

If you outlaw geo-restrictions then poorer countries will not get any books/shows at all because people would just buy/stream it from India or somewhere at a cost of next to nothing due to the cost of living differences.

Precisely.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

To be more exact geographic restrictions are an attempt to get as much money as possible (Which is fine, this is a business not a public service)

If you outlaw geo-restrictions then poorer countries will not get any books/shows at all because people would just buy/stream it from India or somewhere at a cost of next to nothing due to the cost of living differences.

Exactly.

Shari

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

To be more exact geographic restrictions are an attempt to get as much money as possible (Which is fine, this is a business not a public service)

If you outlaw geo-restrictions then poorer countries will not get any books/shows at all because people would just buy/stream it from India or somewhere at a cost of next to nothing due to the cost of living differences.

Do you mean like how companies acquire labour in the global economy?

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The result of that would be much higher prices for the consumer. Every distributor would have to buy world-wide distribution rights, and the potential increase in sales would almost certainly not cover those additional costs, which would inevitably be passed on to the consumer. Are you willing to pay double or triple the existing price?

Why? How about a fair trade act? One that says that if you buy from a particular country, the owner of the right to that country get the revenue?

Or bluntly allow every body to have world wide rights. Period. (Think of it as a form of public domain).

Or only allow geo-restriction for markets where the rights owner in that market has the product available for sale.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Are you suggesting that all content providers should be forced to only sell world-wide rights? The result of that would almost certainly be massively increased prices for the consumer. That's why virtually all video streaming services are single country - the cost of buying right to show it world-wide would be huge, and the legal issues horrendous, with different rights-holders in different countries.

Again, though, none of this has anything to do with "copyright legislation". The title of this thread is extremely misleading.

I was discussing the content of the article and not the title of the thread.

No I'm not saying that content providers should be forced to do anything. They can continue to use their broken model, just don't ask for the government to try to fix it through tougher law enforcement.

There is no reason that costs would go up. They don't have to sell exclusive world wide rights, it can be non exclusive world wide distribution rights and they get compensated with a percentage of the profits rather than one time up front.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Are you suggesting that all content providers should be forced to only sell world-wide rights? The result of that would almost certainly be massively increased prices for the consumer. That's why virtually all video streaming services are single country - the cost of buying right to show it world-wide would be huge, and the legal issues horrendous, with different rights-holders in different countries.

Plus, only multimedia giants could afford to bid and exercise those rights. And if a smaller player somehow landed them, thru wouldn't be able to deploy the content beyond their native region; they wouldn't have money left to do it.

In ebook terms it would be as if only the BPHs could afford to buy manuscripts. No smaller local publishers. And tradpub authors would be limited to 5 bidders, if any.

A boon for IndiePublishing and Amazon, though.

As they say, be careful what you wish for. You might get it and choke on it.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The result of that would be much higher prices for the consumer. Every distributor would have to buy world-wide distribution rights, and the potential increase in sales would almost certainly not cover those additional costs, which would inevitably be passed on to the consumer. Are you willing to pay double or triple the existing price?

You may be right, but I don't believe so. I suspect that the value of the rights would decline accordingly.

I don't think the prices in third world countries argument is a very good one. Even if it had more merit, it argues for a division into disadvantaged and other countries, not regional rights. In any event, in many of those countries only the wealthy middle class can afford books anyway, and piracy is usually rife. I suspect you would find that the market will find a way. Perhaps publishers should be looking to significant price reductions in return for far higher volumes, which is usually an intelligent internet strategy.

Whether poeple like it or not, and for good or for ill, we now have in reality one market. Geo-restrictions are easily circumvented. Get used to it.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Precisely.

I'm confused. You were arguing that prices would go up and now you're agreeing that prices will drop.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Barcey

I'm confused. You were arguing that prices would go up and now you're agreeing that prices will drop.

No, I'm agreeing with Mike's point that the abolition of geo-restrictions would mean the end of producers supplying to countries with low incomes, such as India. "One price for all" does not reflect the reality of the fact that people in different countries do have different disposable incomes.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I'm agreeing with Mike's point that the abolition of geo-restrictions would mean the end of producers supplying to countries with low incomes, such as India. "One price for all" does not reflect the reality of the fact that people in different countries do have different disposable incomes.

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