Right, but as has been pointed out before, the internet is not a highway, and filesharing is not speeding. Realistically the speeding laws are in place to protect the public good (I know I know, 55 saves gas etc etc). 20 MPH in a school zone to protect kids, 35 on residential streets etc. Filesharing physically harms who? It is not theft in the traditional sense. A file shared has not deprived anyone of anything. If person A shares an mp3 with person B, that was legally purchased from company C, Company C has a copy, Person A has a copy and person B has a copy. Nobody deprived. nobody harmed. and Person B copy does not equal lost sale to company C. Research has shown, filesharing actually promotes future sales. No physical harm, conclusive evidence of no monetary harm, so whats the point?
Well it's supposed tyo be All of the people. All of those allowed to vote (in America all adults over the age of 18 allowed to care for themselves, with the exception of some who have been disenfrachised for crimes) are supposed to elect representatives that will represent the voters interests to the best of their abilty. And those able to vote are supposed to have consideration for the interests of those unable to vote (children, mentally disabled, prisoners). This is how a democratic republic is supposed to work. So it's supposed to be Elected by ALL of the People to Represent ALL of the People. However, the reality is not like this.
So, how about the Baen Webscription model?4 books a month, that you keep forever for $15 dollars. Not a true "streaming" type service or all you can eat, but7 a great idea. It has been working for them for several years. I don't know if it generates any income/profit, bu it surely does build fan involvement and brand loyalty. They also have an Ala Cart model that works pretty good too. DRM free books, any many different formats for $6.00 each. Sounds like a great formula for lots of other publishers. And as I understand from Essays by author Eric Flint, these free and low cost options have not hurt the sale of physical copies, but have only caused that side of the Business to grow.
Re: Re: Re: Piracy, Stealing, Theft, Evil, Greed, and other emotional descriptors
But that's the point, there is no proof that the "pirated" file + lost sale. Actually there is fairly conclusive proof that pirated copy has no effect on real sales, as seen by the fact that the most pirated files are the largest grossing products. In areas where file sharing has been blocked or reduced, sales have gone down also.
Sure, that may be true, that subsriptions and subscription counts represnt "assured sales". But there is a way to count that without having a paywall. Click through rates, e-mail subscriptions, registered commenters (Techdirt Insiders), anonymous comments per story etc. (Full Disclosure: I subscribe to techdirt daily e-mail, click through on appropriate adds (almost none since I'm not in the IT industry) and I am a registered commenter.) All of the comments that Mike made are accurate. He never said that subscription numbers weren't important, he said that the income from the subscriptions were not how newspapers made money. I almost never read a physical newspaper any more. I get almost all of my news online. And it is not because of the cost of a newspaper, it's because of convenience. When I had a subscription, I would find that the newspaper would sit unread on the counter while I read all the same stories online, therefore, why have the dang paper?
No matter the fuel source or efficiency, wear and tear on a road is related more to the size of the vehicle than the distance it travels. Motorcycle versus MegaSUV eh? So a road tax based on distance traveled by class of vehicle makes more sense than fuel consumed IF you want to use the tax to maintain the roads.
A fuel tax does the same thing. A truck gets 25 MPG. therefore every 25 miles it travels it pays 50 cents in taxes. A motorcycle burns 50 MPG therefore it pays half the taxes. Not perfectly equitable, but close. Also, Interstate truckers pay special fees based on vehicle weight and load weight, and these fees are supposed to go to the upkeep of roads, the problem is that these funds get raided every time the state needs extra money, like a lot of other special funds.
No, but there should be. True story: I lived in Hawaii for a number of years, and through ignorance filed my income tax with my wife's (I was exempt due to being military with out of state residency.) Anyway, I got a letter saying that I needed to declare my federal income tax refund as income as well as any state income tax refund. The balls of that state, the money that I had loaned the federal government interest free (which I consider to be theft, but that's not part of this discussion) was considered as income not the return of money that was mine to begin with. Sorry for the rant, but 15 years later it still pisses me off that that bunch of crooks made blatant money grab.
Now that's a RTB+CwF experiment I could get behind! What do you say, if a certain level of payment is reached ($10,000?) then a live webcast debate with interested parties could be broadcast? Sounds like a great idea to me-very similar to the "fans pay to produce next album" method that some artists are using (Jill Sobule I think)
So, I just got through reading over some stuff on the RIAA website. Under the section labeled For Students Doing Reports the list of lies, half truths and debunked numbers is staggering. I cannot believe that they get away with passing this stuff off as the truth. A few examples:
1. When you go online and download songs without permission, you are stealing; 2. One credible analysis by the Institute for Policy Innovation concludes that global music piracy causes $12.5 billion of economic losses every year, 71,060 U.S. jobs lost, a loss of $2.7 billion in workers' earnings, and a loss of $422 million in tax revenues, $291 million in personal income tax and $131 million in lost corporate income and production taxes; 3. the record industry was able to discontinue its broad-based end user litigation program. ; 4. Q: What would the RIAA like people to know about the lawsuit program now that it has ended? A:The program was designed to educate fans about the law, the consequences of breaking the law, and raise awareness about all the great legal sites in the music marketplace.; 5. Q: Is it still illegal to download music on P2P sites like LimeWire, BitTorrent and Ares? A:Absolutely; 6. Q: How is downloading music different from copying a personal CD? A:Record companies have never objected to someone making a copy of a CD for their own personal use.; 7. Q: Should devices such as CD burners be outlawed since they are an easy way of making illegal copies of others creative efforts? A:
Devices and technology are not the problem. It’s when people use technology to break the law that we take issue.
Again and again, we have embraced the technological advances that have allowed millions upon millions of people around the world to enjoy the music we create.
1. It's not theft, it's infringement, not the same thing 2. Bogus numbers as has been debunked on techdirt many times 3. no, it hasn't stopped, as debunked on techdirt 4. Was not designed for "education" it was designed as a scare tactic (which I guess in a twisted way you could call education, so OK I'll give them that one back) 5. No there are plenty of free and legal music downloads available via P2P, so just because some music is illegal to download, not all of it is as implied in the statement 6. Yes, they have. both the RIAA and the MPAA have fought for years to hamstring / break recording technology 7. I agree with the first sentence, however the second statement is an outright lie. If they could figure out a way to stay back in the cassete deck (non-recordable) or better yet vinyl album days and make money they would. They have vehemently opposed every new technology that came along until overwhelming consumer demand forced them to adapt.
What, you never xeroxed a page out of a book at a library, ever, really? Or, never copied a recipe out of someone else's recipe book, what about, someone gave you a mixtape once, recorded a song off the radio, printed out a web page of useful information copied and pasted from an online document. All of these are just copying. Or, from your viewpoint theft. Millions of school children every year commit theft when they Xerox pages from reference books for use in school reports or homework. Lock up all them Damn Dirty Thieves..err children..err copyers?
Yes it's always changing, but without rules, or structure if you prefer, then the changes are chaotic, disrtuptive and counter productive. Changes should happen in a way that advances language in a way that makes it easier to communicate, not harder.
the example you gave of the secret club is a good example of CwF+RtB. The secret part is the CwF. It's that shared connection that makes it so special. There are plenty of "secret" clubs in every city-the ones that no one knows about therefore they haver no customers therefore they go out of business. The same with bands. I think I see what you are trying to drive at, If I make my music so special and so exclusive, then people will pay for this exclusive invitation only show. But the problem is, how do you get noticed in the first place? I could go out tomorrow and annonce that Matthew Cruse and The Dark Helmets (Sorry DH, had to do it) are performing tomorrow night in an invitation only show at the Blue Oyster Bar. Great, who was the band again? never heard of them, guess I'll go see Foghat instead. But, if i turn around and release this great song to my friends, and they give it away to their friends, and so on and this buzz builds, then I do the same thing-Now we're cookin'. So, the infinite good (free song) leveraged the finite good (bands time) into making more money. I really don't think that there is an exact type of parralel in the art world that would work. Except that there are a whole lot of artists out there that are looking for recognition too. You are right that there is tons of clutter, bbut the "spread them out freely" is a way to rise above that clutter, to be seen as something special by getting your name ou there.
OK, My last comment on this thread. Mike has said it and I have said it, and I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse to get a reaction, or if the concept does not sink in.
infinitely reproducible at no cost equals infinite good (pretty much any DRM free digital media, the DRM is an artificial constraint on an infinite good)
Some physical object or certain other intangible but measurable item (i.e. a persons time or effort) is a scarce good. If I add an infinite good which a consumer is unwilling to pay for on it's own (a song, story, image in a digital medium) to a scarce good (such as a performers time, an autographed newspaper clipping, a limited lithograph) I can leverage one to exact a higher price for the other. That's it. infinite good+scarce good=more money. Period end of story. Your own example of a bazaar is perfect. scarce good (old chair) + infinite good (cool story) = more money. Yes, the story is infinite. It can be reproduced at almost no cost by anyone that has heard/seen it. I don't know any other way to put it. So, I hope this gets through, because I give up.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point, again
Reproducible for free also does not make something infinite.
Yes, it does
Again, I would argue that non-physical is not necessarily the same as infinite.
No one said it did.
The point is an infinitely reproducable story, due to it's nature of being infinitely reproducible has added value to a scarce good to raise it's price from 75 cents to $51 currently. These are facts. Is anyone, at this point, willing to pay for the story by itself, probably not. Is anyone willing to pay for the object? definitely, at least 14 people. Infinite good on it's own=little or no value to consumer. Finite good on it's own=little value to consumer ($0.75). Finite good + Infinite good = Value ($51.00 a 6800% increase in value). Which was the point of the original post in the first place
Yes, but your thinking about it backwards, or sideways or some such. The idea here is-get some object (scarce good, cost is irrelevant) have some people write stories (scarce good of authors time/creativity) sell good story in physical form with said object (scarce goods) [from the ebay website:The significance of this object has been invented by the author; see SignificantObjects.com for details. (Winning bidder also receives a copy of Matthew J. Wells' story about this object. This story is the winner of the Significant Objects/Slate Story Contest. ]the story, once published electronically on the internet is now an INFINITE good-cost doesn't matter, it can be copied and republished a million times at essentially no cost-to anyone. The idea is not to enhance a products salability with a story-No one cares about a $0.75 jar of barbeque sauce, they care about the ephemeral things of Wow, that's a cool story, wow what a cool idea, wow I get bragging rights because I have this thing that this guy wrote a really cool story about, Wow, when this guy is famous (maybe) 10 years from now, I helped support him / get him started when I participated in this really cool experiment thing. It's all of these wows at the end that are the real scarce goods, they are hard to duplicate and almost impossible to fabricate, but in the end they are the payoff that everyone wants-the consumer the artist the manufacturer, the publisher, because these ephemeral Wows are what drive everything else.