1 2 3 4 5
MrJoshua
MrJoshua PowerDork
8/2/13 8:23 p.m.
David S. Wallens wrote:
Zomby Woof wrote: In reply to Dr. Hess: That's what I've said all along, and why I don't feel bad for not paying for that stuff. Charge a reasonable price and I will pay it. Get greedy, and I won't.
Do you also steal other goods and services that you think are overpriced?

The difference comes when you say "goods". "Stealing" as we all grew up to know it involved taking a physical item from someone. Taking that item not only gained you the item, but directly denied someone else that item and all of the benefits that went with possession. It was a very clear winner loser situation and our upbringings typically were very anti winning without in some way earning the victory. Our upbringings also tended to emphasize not doing harm to others.

When you talk about something like music or television "stealing" it means you gained access to it without permission. The original owner still has it and anyone else who wants it can still get it. Then you see the original owner still making large amounts of money on the product so it is hard to see harm. The "stealing" is also justified by our cassette tape and rewritable CD and DVD upbringing. We were told it was legally fine to copy things as long as we were not making money off of them.

I have bittorrented very few things in my life and don't really buy that much entertainment so I don't have a huge stake in this debate, but I don't see it as black and white as people try to make it out to be.

MrJoshua
MrJoshua PowerDork
8/2/13 8:32 p.m.

Oh and sadly I do believe many many humans would gladly steal physical property if it was as easy to do and as hard to get caught as when illegally downloading music and shows.

Zomby Woof
Zomby Woof PowerDork
8/3/13 8:20 a.m.

In reply to MrJoshua:

That's as good a justification as any I could think of

I've never been a thief. Back when we were young and my buddies were stealing bikes and stuff, I never wanted anything to do with it. For whatever reason, I have a real problem with copyright laws. I think they're wrong, and unfairly protect an industry that doesn't need or deserve it. IMO it grossly over values some things, and disproportionately lines the pockets of many.

FWIW, I have never downloaded music, a movie, TV shows or anything like that. I'm not a big consumer of television and can count on one hand how many times I've been to the movie theater in the last 30 years. It's a not an industry I choose to support. If somebody wants to give ma a CD that they've downloaded, I will gladly take it. If I want to support an artist, I'll buy one.

I have learned that the only way to change a law or rule in this country is to break it. If enough people do, it will get changed. That's how it works, and that's how I approach it. The Canadian government's approach to what you refer to as piracy has softened a lot in the last ten years, and is far less aggressive than that of the U.S., and I believe that is why.

Alan Cesar
Alan Cesar Associate Editor
8/5/13 7:50 a.m.
I have bittorrented very few things in my life and don't really buy that much entertainment so I don't have a huge stake in this debate, but I don't see it as black and white as people try to make it out to be.

But you do have a huge stake in this debate if you consume any media outside of free, broadcast television and radio that you pick up with an antenna. I pay my bills thanks to copyright laws. I'll walk it one step further and say that my job, our magazine, most other magazines, television and movies are possible only because of copyright laws.

There's a high cost to produce high-quality media. We're not just thinking about things and putting them on paper. GRM is funding project cars. It's paying for people to cover events and photograph them. It's hiring good designers to lay out pages and illustrate widgets. There might be people willing to do that work for free, but it's unlikely we'll find many that do a good job and do it in a timely manner. Want to see what you get when your writers are paid a dollar a story? Go to Hooniverse.

GRM also heats and cools a building, buys camera equipment, computers, Internet access, and a handy dandy message board for our loyal readers and fans.

Yes, it's cheap to make copies of published work. That doesn't make it any cheaper to make the original. No one's going to make that kind of investment without expecting to make their money back. If copyright laws didn't exist, the first person who bought a copy could turn around and start selling them cut-rate, screwing the original investors and producers.

Just because they actually do sell a lot of copies and make a lot of money doing it doesn't make it right for anyone to steal it. If there weren't copyright laws to protect the people who make all this cool stuff, there wouldn't be so much cool stuff to steal.

How big does a company have to be before it's considered OK to steal from them? If someone cracks our digital edition and starts distributing free PDFs of our magazines, would it be hard to see the harm? Are we already big enough to steal from?

dean1484
dean1484 UberDork
8/5/13 8:09 a.m.

To show hou niev I am I thaught this thread was going to be about off brand megasquirts or Chinese knock offs of german or american car technology.

JoeyM
JoeyM Mod Squad
8/5/13 9:20 a.m.
Alan Cesar wrote: GRM also heats and cools a building, buys camera equipment, computers, Internet access, and a handy dandy message board for our loyal readers and fans.

This. I've said many times here that I don't read the magazine that much, but I'm a subscriber to support the upkeep of the forum.

FWIW, there are other forums (without a magazine) where people pay to support the site. The HAMB comes to mind....free forum, but the HAMB members who support the forum financially have special designators by their usernames (IIRC they are called "HAMB Alliance" members)

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner MegaDork
8/5/13 9:30 a.m.
Alan Cesar wrote: How big does a company have to be before it's considered OK to steal from them? If someone cracks our digital edition and starts distributing free PDFs of our magazines, would it be hard to see the harm? Are we already big enough to steal from?

There are studies that show that free PDFs would benefit your bottom line, actually. And those are based on works that are not advertiser supported. Since GRM is really paid for by the advertisers, it might actually be a worthwhile business model. More circulation, better advertising income, no additional pesky costs involved in moving around dead trees with pretty pictures on them.

What exactly is an "off brand Megasquirt"? It's an open source platform

Zomby Woof
Zomby Woof PowerDork
8/5/13 10:37 a.m.

That's what I've always said. The business model would be different, but everything would still exist.

There was a time when recorded music wasn't allowed to be played on the radio. They siad nobody would buy it if it was available for free. I'm sure the same geniuses were also against the home video recorder because it would destroy the television and movie industry.

I suggest that content would be better because they'd have to work harder to make the same buck.

Marjorie Suddard
Marjorie Suddard General Manager
8/5/13 10:50 a.m.

Um, yeah, we're reading the studies. Check out this site. Enjoying the free forum? Reading the free content? Great. Now realize that the site is subsidized by the print product.

One day we sincerely hope this will change, and are certainly in a better position than most to take advantage of this sea change when it happens, since we already have a robust fee-free universe with great traffic, but the sad truth is that at this point, the shakeout has not yet happened where there is a clear line from "give people stuff for free" and "profit." Right now, companies do want eyeballs, but they don't yet understand how to buy access to them on the internet, nor are they conditioned to do so. And users have not followed content behind paywalls in the way that they're starting to do with broadcast media (witness the success of Hulu, Netflix and iTunes for streaming).

"Working harder to make the same buck" happened 10 years ago, and has escalated in the years since. Most creative is already at the wall. Why do you think the tube is filled with reality shows, musicians only make money touring, and the Boston Globe just sold for 7 percent of the value at its last recorded sale?

The sad truth is that artistic endeavors are voraciously consumed while being absolutely undervalued.

Margie

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt UltraDork
8/5/13 10:53 a.m.
Keith Tanner wrote: What exactly is an "off brand Megasquirt"? It's an open source platform

Not GNU style open source, though. Technically, you are free to alter the source code but only licensed to use it on genuine MegaSquirt hardware or licensed derivatives (such as the MS3-Pro).

JoeyM
JoeyM Mod Squad
8/5/13 11:03 a.m.
MadScientistMatt wrote:
Keith Tanner wrote: What exactly is an "off brand Megasquirt"? It's an open source platform
Not GNU style open source, though. Technically, you are free to alter the source code but only licensed to use it on genuine MegaSquirt hardware or licensed derivatives (such as the MS3-Pro).

Thanks for the clarification. It is good to hear it from someone who works with the stuff every day.

JoeyM
JoeyM Mod Squad
8/5/13 11:15 a.m.
Marjorie Suddard wrote: "Working harder to make the same buck" happened 10 years ago, and has escalated in the years since. Most creative is already at the wall. Why do you think the tube is filled with reality shows, musicians only make money touring, and the Boston Globe just sold for 7 percent of the value at its last recorded sale? The sad truth is that artistic endeavors are voraciously consumed while being absolutely undervalued. Margie

In biology, we say there are two ways to make a living in this world - producing and consuming. Every organism does one, the other, or a mix of the two. Guess what? Human culture is the same way.

Until you try producing something, you have no idea what kind of effort goes into it. I like prewar cars, you know, from a styling/customizing standpoint. I liked seeing what other people had done to chop the roof, lean the A pillar, etc. It was not until I decided to try fabricating one that I realized how much skill/effort goes into metal modification.

It is easy to consume (listen to) other people's music. It is much more difficult to do what poopshovel did recently; i.e. schlep your equipment to Orlando and MAKE the music....that's not counting all the time practicing to get ready for the gig. Does he deserve to be compensated? Heck, yeah.

If you enjoy his strain of thrash or metal or whatnot, you should send some money his way so he keeps producing what you love. (Not my music - currently listening to a Motown cover of nickleback - I would have been there if it was.....heck I probably should have gone anyway and worn a GRM shirt just to let poop know that he was among friends.)

David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
8/5/13 11:17 a.m.
Keith Tanner wrote: There are studies that show that free PDFs would benefit your bottom line, actually. And those are based on works that are not advertiser supported.

Amazon wants to charge me $17 for your latest book. Where is the free version?

Marjorie Suddard
Marjorie Suddard General Manager
8/5/13 11:20 a.m.

Speaking of Poopy's concert, David was just telling me about it. He said it was fabulous. And yes, touring musicians work especially hard, and most of them rely on merchandise sales to pay for luxuries like... food to eat. So remember to always stop by that table and buy at least a CD, and ideally a t-shirt too, because hauling around road cases on an empty stomach sucks. And being able to afford roadies is a thing of the past for all but the elite.

Margie

JoeyM
JoeyM Mod Squad
8/5/13 11:20 a.m.
David S. Wallens wrote:
Keith Tanner wrote: There are studies that show that free PDFs would benefit your bottom line, actually. And those are based on works that are not advertiser supported.
Amazon wants to charge me $17 for your latest book. Where is the free version?

Good point. I'm sure book authors want to be compensated for their work, too.

FWIW, I bought a copy of the locost book.....mostly because I could ask Keith questions here about the content as I worked on my build. BTW, that's something Keith has right.....his hands on interaction with our forum, fielding questions and such, has done a LOT for the reputation of FM.

Same thing with GRM. I do subscribe to a few other car magazines, and they have forums, but I hang out here......You guys interact with us, and that creates loyalty.

Alan Cesar
Alan Cesar Associate Editor
8/5/13 11:29 a.m.
David S. Wallens wrote:
Keith Tanner wrote: There are studies that show that free PDFs would benefit your bottom line, actually. And those are based on works that are not advertiser supported.
Amazon wants to charge me $17 for your latest book. Where is the free version?

Actually...

http://books.google.com/books?id=wvnQbYLEj6wC&lpg=PP1&dq=how%20to%20build%20a%20high%20performance%20mazda%20miata&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Keith's legit.

David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
8/5/13 11:38 a.m.

That's just a preview.

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
8/5/13 11:42 a.m.

There are a lot of gross oversimplifications in this thread.

Let me first say, I know very little about producing revenue in artistic medium. However, I am very close to someone who is at the top of the heap.

My cousin is FX Networks President and FX Productions CEO. That puts him over all aspects of entertainment and business operations for FX Networks, including FX, FXM (formerly Fox Movie Channel), FXX, FX Productions and the digital video-on-demand platform, FXNOW.

He wrestles with piracy issues every day.

But here is the bottom line. The revenue stream for an artistic endeavor is NOT linear. You don't make it for $ X.XX and sell it for an additional percentage.

When he makes a revenue model for a product, it has a 30 year revenue stream. That will include box office sales, cable licensing, DVD's, US releases, foreign releases, re-releases, online licensing, etc. etc. The revenue pie has at least a dozen different major divisions, with hundreds of subsets. Each of these releases and divisions is sold separately, and staggered to generate revenue.

Part of the formula is that he knows there will be some piracy. He accounts for it. Therefore, it is not exactly stealing from him, it is part of the business expense he plans for.

He is continually shifting and repositioning his company's intellectual properties to maximize revenues. That's what makes Rupert Murdoch (his boss) happy.

I'm not excusing theft. But I am suggesting that there are MANY ways to generate revenues on artistic endeavors, and whining about stuff isn't one of them. Today's artistic business world is a very complicated landscape, with great opportunities.

For the record, I am like Joey. I buy the magazine, though I often do not read it.

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
8/5/13 11:50 a.m.
Alan Cesar wrote: I just deleted a thread where a user was asking about where to watch a certain car show online for free.
David S. Wallens wrote: Amazon wants to charge me $17 for your latest book. Where is the free version?

Irony.

tuna55
tuna55 PowerDork
8/5/13 12:00 p.m.
SVreX wrote: Part of the formula is that he knows there will be some piracy. He accounts for it. Therefore, it is not exactly stealing from him, it is part of the business expense he plans for.

Planning for theft/loss is good business. It is still stealing when it happens, though.

Duke
Duke PowerDork
8/5/13 12:07 p.m.
SVreX wrote: Part of the formula is that he knows there will be some piracy. He accounts for it. Therefore, it is not exactly stealing from him, it is part of the business expense he plans for.

No, it is still EXACTLY stealing. It's just stealing that is accounted for ahead of time, like inventory shrink. If the piracy wasn't happening, his costs would be lower. That would result in higher profits, or lower consumer pricing, or both.

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
8/5/13 12:08 p.m.

Yes, it is stealing.

Maybe if we all agree not to steal, he will discount the price, since he no longer needs to charge his good customers for the loss.

Hmmm...

Duke
Duke PowerDork
8/5/13 12:10 p.m.
SVreX wrote:
Alan Cesar wrote: I just deleted a thread where a user was asking about where to watch a certain car show online for free.
David S. Wallens wrote: Amazon wants to charge me $17 for your latest book. Where is the free version?
Irony.

That's not ironic in any way... David was asking Keith to put his money where his mouth is. Keith was the one who raised the idea of giving away the product.

Giving away the product is fine as a business model, as long as it is the creator / owner's choice. But as the consumer, you don't get to apply that model to somebody else's business, just because you don't agree with their price point or delivery method.

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
8/5/13 12:10 p.m.

My point was that he never suffered a loss. He was paid for it (if he did his job well).

Doesn't excuse the theft (which I was pretty clear about).

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
8/5/13 12:12 p.m.
Duke wrote:
SVreX wrote:
Alan Cesar wrote: I just deleted a thread where a user was asking about where to watch a certain car show online for free.
David S. Wallens wrote: Amazon wants to charge me $17 for your latest book. Where is the free version?
Irony.
That's not ironic in any way... David was asking Keith to put his money where his mouth is. Keith was the one who raised the idea of giving away the product. **Giving away the product is fine as a business model, as long as it is the creator / owner's choice.** But as the consumer, you don't get to apply that model to somebody else's business, just because you don't agree with their price point or delivery method.

I agree.

I did miss David's sarcasm.

1 2 3 4 5

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
pU4bf15f7HQJSZyo4SKhCPmDzxknWCPkaqfu9GSmJ5lrehN05kiPYWnzqXP05bxL