Torrent throwdown on the Wizards board

[Westwind]

For the first part, show me the exact quote that says "I don't pay for stuff because it should be free".

For the second, prove that 5%.
Now, for the other 95%, the bands get to be more known, so, in fact, they get to sell more merchandising and concert tickets.
A quick fact -> Music CD sells decreased 0.7% last year in Spain (by any factor, actually) while concerts increased up to 45%.

For comparison's sake, album sales in the States have dropped more than 25% over the last two years. Obviously, this number is somewhat offset by an increase in legit digital sales, but it's still a net loss for the industry. DVD sales dropped roughly 2% last year, which may seem like a small number but when you consider the amazing rate of growth that sector was showing not too long ago, it's a jarring change in direction. Some of the album sales decline can probably be attributed to a lackluster product--there hasn't been a "mega" album for awhile now. But Ashley Simpson only explains some of the decline.

Also, for the sake of academic honesty, the Harvard/UNC study is at odds with various other studies (no shock there), including Edison Research, U. Texas, and Forrester.

Finally, for what it's worth, the guy who came up with the idea of indirect appropriability (aka when piracy generates revenue for the company) admits that it's just a theoretical state that will never actually see the light of day.

 

[Novem5er]

How would you feel if you found out somebody recorded all your classes without your permission and put them on the internet? What if the school district decided to fire you and just played those videos to the next year's students? You are being paid for your knowledge, and you are not distributing it for free.

I would not like to be fired. Being fired would be tantamount to the public no longer paying me for spreading my knowledge. I would suffer, but so too would the public and the kids I teach. Why?

-Videos cannot answer questions.
-Videos cannot expand ideas beyond the recording.
-Videos cannot collect and gather NEW knowledge.
-Videos cannot monitor classroom behavior.
-Videos cannot nurture the social interaction between humans.

People would be welcome to tape my lessons and post them online, as long as I still got paid to teach them. My point is that knowledge requires SOME people to pay for its creation and distribution, but everyone who accesses that knowledge does not need to pay to do so.

 

[billd91]

I often see the "Information should be/wants to be free" argument when we're talking about someone else's information and property. I'd like to see proponents of this policy post their personal and financial information in a public fashion. Such disclosure would show more sincerity than hiding behind internet anonymity.

There's a difference between information that should be confidential and information that you intend to make public. The "information should be free" crowd is saying that about information intended to be presented in the public, not personal or confidential information.

 

[The_Fan]

This. Most people downloading the books probably already have them on pre-order and are very unlikely to cancel it becuase of the download.

From a practical POV, who is going to print a 1000 pages? How much would it cost on a home printer.

Anyway, aside from WOTC probably expecting this, I dont think it will ruin the offical launch.

Back to business as usual, so what about those badge minions...

I know someone who is printing it out, but that's because he works at a print shop and can do it for free. He also has it on preorder.

I'll repost my opinion, since it seems to have been drowned out in the shouting:

I have no small gameshop. None. At all. Not "in the next city over." Try "the next continent over." I would have to swim across the bleedin' Pacific Ocean to find the nearest game shop.

As such, "supporting the little guy" is a moot point to me. It simply does not apply. And given that I'm overseas, I likely will not see my (preordered 3 months ago) books until at LEAST a week after the street date. And that's if for some bizarre reason customs doesn't decide to hold on to my package for an extra month in the interest of national security, like they did my birthday cake.*

In my case, is it unethical to download the pdfs?

*Not bitter at all.

 

[warlockwannabe]

I
I do wish WotC had put PDFs of their books on sale. I know a fair number of people would have actually paid for it. A lot would pirate it, sure, but I figure in any given gaming group, at least one player will buy a physical copy to make playing the game easier.

.

Um they have been for quite some time....

 

[Cirex]

For comparison's sake, album sales in the States have dropped more than 25% over the last two years. Obviously, this number is somewhat offset by an increase in legit digital sales, but it's still a net loss for the industry. DVD sales dropped roughly 2% last year, which may seem like a small number but when you consider the amazing rate of growth that sector was showing not too long ago, it's a jarring change in direction. Some of the album sales decline can probably be attributed to a lackluster product--there hasn't been a "mega" album for awhile now. But Ashley Simpson only explains some of the decline.

Let's ASSUME that the 25% is caused, enterily, by downloading. Isn't it weird that the country with the most (we compare USA with Europe now) restrictive laws is the one suffering more from free downloading?

USA is also facing an economical crisis...and that affects it. But it's easier to blame "internet thieves".
I really need to go. I would love to keep discussing it, since civil discussion is great for idea reviewing and so on.

Creative Commons is the way to go. Future will prove me, and over 150 million people, right.

 

[JohnSnow]

Exactly! But does every player around the table have to purchase their own set of books in order to be "supporting" the creators? Of course not. But where is the line?

You're engaging in an act of logical sophistry by talking about the difference between 1 person benefitting from a product and 10 people benefitting from the product. Since it's hard to say where you "draw the line" in that case, you're arguing that it's hard to say where to draw the line period.

To which I say: rubbish!

At the point at which you post a product online for anyone to use, we're not talking about the difference between 1 and 10 people benefitting. We're talking about the difference between 1 and THOUSANDS. At that point, I think we'd all agree that whatever line there is has been crossed.

Or are you telling me that it's "fair" for 9000 people to use the product as long as one of them paid for it? Really? Really?!

Under what theory is this right? I suppose the idea is that none of those 9000 would have paid for it, and so you're not actually costing anyone anything. And you know this for a fact, do you? Fine. Prove it and you won't go to jail.

Sorry, but people are just bending over backwards to try to find some justification for unethical behavior. And the point at which someone is trying to equate stealing music with freeing slaves, I think we're awfully close to Godwin's Law.

 

[RangerWickett]

Um they have been for quite some time....

I meant the 4e pdfs. The books are finished; the pdfs of them should be on sale. I'm not a fan of 'street dates.'

 

[Family]

Future will prove me...right.

Disagree.


---
Mal: "Woman, you are completely off your nut."

 

[Rykion]

My point is that knowledge requires SOME people to pay for its creation and distribution, but everyone who accesses that knowledge does not need to pay to do so.

The number of people who would pay to create and distribute information for free is pretty small. The quality of the vast majority of the work would be amateur when compared to the quality of work people actually pay for. Go to any free art website and you'll see dozens of poor artists for each good artist.