Paul Coelho on Piracy and Publishing

[taosaur]

http://eu.techcrunch.com/2012/01/26/...-as-an-artist/

It's good to see people speaking up who actually get it. There was an EMI exec saying similar stuff yesterday:

http://torrentfreak.com/emi-boss-opp...-issue-120125/

[sbroome]

"Coelho has oft-repeated his view that artists and artistic works do no suffer when they are copied, quite the opposite. Their distribution becomes greater and the artist comes off better as a result. "

This was written so poorly I stopped reading. At the end of the day no matter our views on piracy, the question is about (IMO) honoring the artist's wishes. So if Paulo Coelho feels it's okay, you can pirate HIS stuff. If other people want to restrict their content, leave it alone. Is it that hard?

[taosaur]

Originally Posted by sbroome

At the end of the day no matter our views on piracy, the question is about (IMO) honoring the artist's wishes.

Coelho isn't expressing his wishes or asking/telling what's "okay." He's acknowledging reality.

[RainingLemur]

Coelho has even taken to pirating his own books on The Pirate Bay.

Is that still considered piracy since they're his works?

[azazel1024]

Originally Posted by sbroome

"Coelho has oft-repeated his view that artists and artistic works do no suffer when they are copied, quite the opposite. Their distribution becomes greater and the artist comes off better as a result. "

This was written so poorly I stopped reading. At the end of the day no matter our views on piracy, the question is about (IMO) honoring the artist's wishes. So if Paulo Coelho feels it's okay, you can pirate HIS stuff. If other people want to restrict their content, leave it alone. Is it that hard?

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.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by taosaur

Coelho isn't expressing his wishes or asking/telling what's "okay." He's acknowledging reality.

The laws against piracy are a reality.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by RainingLemur

Is that still considered piracy since they're his works?

Yes. His publisher would not allow him to set the price as "Free", even in a promotional context. So he took his own work and made it "Free". He may have been the author, but the publisher was the one with selling rights.

[taosaur]

Originally Posted by sbroome

The laws against piracy are a reality.

"The laws against piracy" i.e. copyright are a deliberate and mutable construct. Such constructs often fail to address large swaths of reality and are consistently too slow to keep up with technology.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by taosaur

He's acknowledging reality.

This is not reality:

nobody thinks about making money when they write a book

Another howler:

[In the] Soviet Union they used to publish their books for free because they wanted to be read and to express their values

Actually, almost all of the dissident writers, like Solzhenitsyn, tried to get paid for their books. And often, they did, although this year's bestseller could be next year's banned book. If the book was banned, sure, they would rather Russians read it for free than not at all. But then what? Pasternak comes to mind as someone who stopped writing fiction when he could not continue selling his titles in his home country.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by taosaur

"The laws against piracy" i.e. copyright are a deliberate and mutable construct. Such constructs often fail to address large swaths of reality and are consistently too slow to keep up with technology.

Technology shouldn't dictate people's morality. I find that with technology (aka price aggregators and websites where you can buy stuff on sale constantly) it's very easy to legally purchase entertainment. If anything the internet is a reason NOT to engage in piracy. One of the sites I follow notified me when the entire run of BSG was available on blu-ray for 80 bucks. What more do people want exactly? After all the cute semantics the reality is that people just want a bunch of free stuff, this isn't a civil rights movement.

[karunaji]

Originally Posted by sbroome

Technology shouldn't dictate people's morality. I find that with technology (aka price aggregators and websites where you can buy stuff on sale constantly) it's very easy to legally purchase entertainment.

I wish that it would be so but in reality I can legally buy only about 10% of works that I am interested in and which are available worldwide. And I am probably very generous, it is more closer to 1%.

Of course, tastes are different. Some people are fine with whatever they can watch on cable TV. But if you want to read or watch something available in other languages or in other country, then the absurdity of the control becomes clearly evident. Often piracy just fills the gap of the market failure.

If anything the internet is a reason NOT to engage in piracy. One of the sites I follow notified me when the entire run of BSG was available on blu-ray for 80 bucks. What more do people want exactly? After all the cute semantics the reality is that people just want a bunch of free stuff, this isn't a civil rights movement.

Been there, done that. So often they simply don't ship to Latvia at all. And when you have something less popular than BSG then it is a game of pure luck. Besides, who uses DVDs anymore when everyone has fast internet connection.

Some guys circumvent georestrictions by VPN connection to watch US Netflix subscription. It is still considered piracy but it also proves that at least in some cases it is not about getting free stuff.

[karunaji]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Actually, almost all of the dissident writers, like Solzhenitsyn, tried to get paid for their books. And often, they did, although this year's bestseller could be next year's banned book. If the book was banned, sure, they would rather Russians read it for free than not at all. But then what? Pasternak comes to mind as someone who stopped writing fiction when he could not continue selling his titles in his home country.

That proves again that people are not very interesting in works that were written for money. The Soviet literature tradition was very rich. It is hard to find good works after the breakup of the Soviet Union.

Dissident writing was somewhat interesting because it was dissident but in general they were poorly written. I find more interesting the works of writers who criticized the Soviet system in a subtle way to get their works through censure and at the same time make the point understandable by readers. In fact, they were so successful that the whole idea of the Soviet system became fully discredited in the public mind. It was prime reason why the Soviet Union fell so quickly that even the best western experts could not explain it.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by karunaji

I wish that it would be so but in reality I can legally buy only about 10% of works that I am interested in and which are available worldwide. And I am probably very generous, it is more closer to 1%.

Of course, tastes are different. Some people are fine with whatever they can watch on cable TV. But if you want to read or watch something available in other languages or in other country, then the absurdity of the control becomes clearly evident. Often piracy just fills the gap of the market failure.

Yes I'm sure it's different in many places like that, unfortunately you aren't OWED access to entertainment. This isn't a civil right. The point can't be more basic.

Been there, done that. So often they simply don't ship to Latvia at all. And when you have something less popular than BSG then it is a game of pure luck. Besides, who uses DVDs anymore when everyone has fast internet connection.

Some guys circumvent georestrictions by VPN connection to watch US Netflix subscription. It is still considered piracy but it also proves that at least in some cases it is not about getting free stuff.

Yes if it's less popular/common you are more likely to pay a premium. The same way it's been forever in every single possible application. I do find many georestrictions idiotic though.

[Quexos]

Careful, some mods could interpret this thread as one condoning piracy

[taosaur]

Originally Posted by sbroome

Technology shouldn't dictate people's morality.

Neither should law or corporate fiat.