Piracy

[Cadfan]

When file sharing decreases because of a rash of lawsuits, let me know.

I actually believe this has already happened.

Its like speeding tickets. Most people don't get tickets when they speed. Some people do. Everyone still speeds, but not as much and they're more discrete about it.

There's... a bit of a mismatch between the penalty amounts and the crime, unfortunately. We'd probably have a more efficient regulatory system if, instead of mercilessly beating up one in every million illegal file sharers, we dinged one in every ten thousand every few days. But that would require government action. The private system isn't set up to allow one entity to sue thousands of smaller entities. It does alright with thousands of small entities suing one large one, but not the reverse.

 

[xechnao]

When file sharing decreases because of a rash of lawsuits, let me know.

It seems that this is the only thing that the current status quo can resort to so it can go on milking the cows. For them it is better create some victims of everyday people by their possibility of lobbying on the goverment and the goverment seems to accept this so far rather than try to change the system and fix things for most people-including the interests of artists.

 

[Kichwas]

Regarding the statement "it's impossible to compete with free" I give you ... "bottled water". Water, free for everyone made into anything from a fashion-statement or a way of life.

What's funny about this is it has zero to do with quality.

San Francisco in the 1800s committed environmental heresy by flooding one of the most beautiful valleys in North America and turning it into a reservoir. The resulting Hetch-Hetchy reservoir provides some of the cleanest water in the world - on tap. An unadvertised, public secret.

And yet our city is full of fools running around with bottled water from all sorts of dirty sources, when they could just as well turn on any tap in city limits and get much better quality.

(Side note: Its also an interesting debate as to the reservoir - environmentalists today are on both sides of the debate over removing it, as its very likely doing so would do more harm to California's ecosystem than keeping it. Both in the actual harm of removal, and the greater harm that would come from using other sources.)

People will pay for something that is free, even if the free version is vastly better, if the branding on the for pay version is well done.

 

[xechnao]

It does alright with thousands of small entities suing one large one, but not the reverse.

This is not the problem. The problem is that only a sovereign goverment can acceptably control certain public things such as ...lawmaking. And lawmaking must control the limits of expression (which includes file sharing)-not a private company. It is the goverment which gives a possibility to sue: but they do not give them a possibility to monitor and control your internet behaviour by themselves beyond the ways everyone has to monitor and control things. So the goverment is the only one that could really control what happens in the internet. But if they go on to do this companies like Microsoft, Yahoo or ISPs would take a huge hit -not to talk about current publishers that want to retain the status of the only viable means of marketing your products as an artist -since it seems only super marketing can beat piracy and can make your work profitable as a the powerless artists that most of them seem to be.

 

[Kichwas]

Mainly because every time it's occurred in the past few hundred years it's been a bad thing.

Socialist realism, Nazi propaganda films, the Stationer's Company.

State or public controlled media?

Don't forget PBS and the BBC, or if you live in Korea, KBS.

...

Oh wait...

Those ones actually work and produce quality material.

There's also AAFES for US military personnel, but they're mostly a distributor, and well, you could argue they're not as good as they could be. But that's mostly because they never seem to have the newer stuff...

 

[Mouseferatu]

Im not advocating a political position, Im just pointing out the reality that technology has made purchasing a "product" to enjoy art, unnesecary.

Which does not, in any way, shape, or form, alter the amount of labor, time, or talent that goes into creating that art.

As for doctors, lawyers, fireman, etc, working for free; if technology makes their jobs obsolete than they can probably expect the same eventual demise now being experianced by the "paid artist".

Except that technology hasn't made the "paid artist" obsolete. Being obsolete isn't what we're talking about here. As I just said, someone still has to create the art in question. If technology could create the works of art/literature/music/whatever--just as well, and just as creatively, as a human being--then technology might make artists obsolete. So no, your comparison doesn't even remotely hold up.

 

[ProfessorPain]

Except that technology hasn't made the "paid artist" obsolete. Being obsolete isn't what we're talking about here. As I just said, someone still has to create the art in question. If technology could create the works of art/literature/music/whatever--just as well, and just as creatively, as a human being--then technology might make artists obsolete. So no, your comparison doesn't even remotely hold up.

This is a good point. As long as it takes talent to make a picture, people with talent will expect to get paid. Same goes for literature, music, etc. The few who do it for free, are trampling on their own livelihood. There may be some who are willing to do so. But most of us want to make a living AND do what we love.

By the way, awsome handle Mouseferatu.

 

[mudbunny]

I haven't read the whole thread, but does anyone remember a mere year ago when WotC reps said that there would some way for people who bought the core books to automatically get access to online digital versions? Man, I know that ain't a false memory.

They said that they would do that. But then when they actually looked into the processes required to ensure that only the people that actually bought the books would be getting the .pdfs, they discovered that it would have been a very large hassle to do and decided to drop the plan, Instead, they changed it so that anyone who is a DDI subscriber gets access, via the compendium, to *every* 4E book that WotC has released. Not the fluff, but almost all of the rules components/mechanics. Monsters, items, spells, etc.

 

[Chaos Disciple]

Which does not, in any way, shape, or form, alter the amount of labor, time, or talent that goes into creating that art.


Except that technology hasn't made the "paid artist" obsolete. Being obsolete isn't what we're talking about here. As I just said, someone still has to create the art in question. If technology could create the works of art/literature/music/whatever--just as well, and just as creatively, as a human being--then technology might make artists obsolete. So no, your comparison doesn't even remotely hold up.

Your right, technology doesnt alter the labor of the artist. What technology has done, is eliminate the way you profit from that labor.

 

[rgard]

Hi All, I posted awhile back in this thread.

Just curious, but could the folks who don't have a problem with piracy (in the context here where rpg games and supplements are downloaded via P2P or copied and shared) let us know what they do for a living?

To be honest, I truly don't understand why folks think it's ok, but maybe if we know what your line of work is, maybe I can get my head around this.

Thanks,
Rich

P.S. I'm not one of those who think it's ok to download stuff with out permission of the owner, but I should mention my line of work. I'm a former game store owner and currently work for a local utility.