By John C Dvorak
Thursday January 19, 2012
This argument is too practical and realistic to get any traction.
I don’t think the argument is that there might be positive side effects to people pirating your work. That is arguable and there’s no real way of knowing either way. There are some content creators who like it and some who don’t. I just think that it should be by choice. I’m not in favour of SOPA and PIPPA, but I am in favour of shutting down real piracy. If an author wants to give away his book for free because he thinks of it as advertising, that’s fantastic! I just don’t think we should mandate this sharing of work on behalf of authors. You can call an author who doesn’t want his work copied and passed around “short sighted” or “old fashioned”, but remember that not everything is or should be a democracy. If you like what the guy is selling, then buy it. If not then don’t… But don’t steal.
Isn’t is amazing that the SOPA/PIPA bills getting shelved and the DOJ attack on MegaUpload came so close together? The connection is simple. The Hollywood guys are pissed about the White House going against SOPA, and they threatened to cut off funding for Obama’s reelection. Well, we can’t have that, now can we? So Obama threw them a bone by having the DOJ attack MegaUpload. Ain’t life grand?
Animby==we have some loose threads.
first==let me apologize for saying you are wrong 50% of the time. I was too generalized. Fact is, you are 100% correct on your facts, and therefor a resource to all who post here, moreso for myself as I often play horseshoes laying a punji pit for those anxious if not just willing to jump in. Its only on the conclusions you thereafter draw that earns you a 50% return. So conservative you alarmingly are. I was thinking that should mean you are right 75% of the time, but now I’m swinging back to 50%. Facts are one thing, conclusions drawn another. Usually conclusions can be fixed by correcting facts, but if the facts have been agreed upon……… I’ll give it more thought.
Artist: King Missile
Song: Detatchable Penis
I woke up this morning with a bad hangover
And my penis was missing again.
This happens all the time.
[background singing begins: "detachable penis" over and over]
This comes in handy a lot of the time.
I can leave it home, when I think it’s gonna get me in trouble,
or I can rent it out, when I don’t need it.
But now and then I go to a party, get drunk,
and the next morning I can’t for the life of me
remember what I did with it.
First I looked around my apartment, and I couldn’t find it.
So I called up the place where the party was,
they hadn’t seen it either.
I asked them to check the medicine cabinet
’cause for some reason I leave it there sometimes
But not this time.
So I told them if it pops up to let me know.
I called a few people who were at the party,
but they were no help either.
I was starting to get desperate.
I really don’t like being without my penis for too long.
It makes me feel like less of a man,
and I really hate having to sit down every time I take a leak.
After a few hours of searching the house,
and calling everyone I could think of,
I was starting to get very depressed,
so I went to the Kiev, and ate breakfast.
Then, as I walked down Second Avenue towards St. Mark’s Place,
where all those people sell used books and other junk on the street,
I saw my penis lying on a blanket
next to a broken toaster oven.
Some guy was selling it.
I had to buy it off him.
He wanted twenty-two bucks, but I talked him down to seventeen.
I took it home, washed it off,
and put it back on. I was happy again. Complete.
People sometimes tell me I should get it permanently attached,
but I don’t know.
Even though sometimes it’s a pain in the ass,
I like having a detachable penis.
[background voices continue to sing "detachable penis" for
a while, then out]
Its really only the “idea” that is worthy. Song itself is a bit boring, but haven’t you ever gone out on the town and wished you could leave your penis at home? No? Ha, ha.
C–Copyright and Fair Use
Yep, my company got a notice to pay Hollywood for the musak we ran in our elevators and hallways so we did for a month to avoid litigation and finally pumped in royalty free music from some source. So–no free advertising for all those starving artists, only the dead will profit.
Pragmatism==cuts thru a lot of this. Even if a law is well motivated==like IP law, or drugs, or marital infidelity, or cursing, or working on the Sabbath, and on and on as morality will, does it make any sense to pass laws that can only be variably, partially, and hypocritically enforced?=====THATS why Newt Gringrinch should have been asked. Total FAIL by our leading politicians and the press who is supposed to call them to account. Looks like we don’t need/profit from IP law nor do we from the media.
A few years ago Jane Siberry went to a self determined policy for her music from her website. Her suggested price, if you’d like to pay, is 99 cents per song but you can pay whatever you feel is fair including “A Gift from Jane” which is free. No strings attached. No DRM. No EULA. No Nothing.
To date she makes more than 99 cents per song.
Neil Gaiman is right at this point in time, but when the world adjusts to reading books on e-readers as people listen now to music on ipods, there will no longer be a major difference between the paid for version or the pirated version.
Yet, copying CDs digitally has been pushbutton simple for over a decade, as has downloading the music from any number of pirate web sites. Yet online music sales continue to increase!
Your premise is that everyone would be a criminal if there were no benefit to not being one. That’s just not true and how this has played out with music proves this. The overall revenues are still declining in the music industry – but the pace is slowing and online sales are gaining faster. Why? Because, finally, things are changing for the better: usage restrictions (like DRM) have been relaxed; the “cloud” makes use much more convenient for people. The file you paid for is finally as good as the one you could get for free before. (With DRM, it wasn’t as good – you couldn’t easily copy it to any device or share it with a friend to turn them onto something new).
When the product is offered at a reasonable price, and is as convenient as getting it free, most people will choose to just pay for it. This is a lesson that the content providers can’t seem to learn.
How can I pay to “rent” any old movie online? You can’t. The distribution wars make that impossible. Your choices to see new movies are: pay way too much money for movie channels; rent through the mail from Netflix; rent from Red Box; rent from your cable provider.
The last one costs a buck fifty. Netfix via mail takes a couple days. Movie channels suck and you have no control over what you see. The last one assumes you get cable TV; they are offering that movie; and it’s at least 4 times as expensive as Red Box.
Why is there no legal way to get this content online for a couple dollars, which is the right price point for a one time rental?
If there were, online downloads would be out of business in no time.
Click here to cancel reply.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Notify me of followup comments via e-mail
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Tweets by @THErealDVORAK
© 2008 Copyright Dvorak News Blog
Bad Behavior has blocked 49836 access attempts in the last 7 days.