These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

In a world where Intellectual Property piracy doesn't exist...

First post
Author
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
#21 - 2012-05-09 12:16:56 UTC
How much did it cost to see Beethoven or Bach back in the day?

edit: I meant 'hear'.

Everyone vs. Everyone Online

"The universe is made of stories, not atoms"

SpaceSquirrels
#22 - 2012-05-09 13:03:21 UTC
Karma wrote:
How much did it cost to see Beethoven or Bach back in the day?

edit: I meant 'hear'.



Considering only the rich could attend concerts I'm sure quite a lot. It wasn't like the theater which had standing room for "The rest of us." Also a full orchestra costs money too.
Telegram Sam
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2012-05-09 15:39:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Telegram Sam
[Great Wall of Text... sorry, couldn't say it shorter]

OK, consider this example:
Four art school college guys form a band. They call it "The Pink Floyd Sound." Two can actually play instruments, two are just learning. They're all usually stoned or tripping on the current varieties of experimental drugs. They put together some pretty conventional songs, by current tastes and standards. Pretty good, but nothing especially unique or groundbreaking. They get some gigs at college art school parties, little low-rent underground clubs, and other places where freaks hang out. During some of these performances, in addition to their regular set, they play free-form tripping freak-out jams that go on for half an hour at a time. Eventually the word gets out locally, among the trip-out artsy crowd, that The Pink Floyd Sound is an "experience" to do.

There's a bottom-rung operator/entrepreneur that works for a record company on commission. His girlfriend takes him to a Floyd event. He sees that these guys represent a certain niche "scene." He figures they might buy some records. He sells the record company on bringing Floyd into the studio to record some tracks with a professional producer. The record company sends records to radio stations. The operator/entrepreneur guy calls up all of his contacts at the stations and sells them on giving the songs some airplay. The songs get some modest attention and sell some records. The company brings the band back to the studio to make record a full album ("The Piper at the Gates of Dawn"). They also give the band members some cash up front to pay their rent and bills.

The album sells some copies, and one song from it gets some fairly significant airplay on local stations. It's enough that record company decides keep the band as in its stable and give them some management support. The band now has an album under its belt and it can now go semi-pro and start playing bigger venues. In a few months it goes to the studio again and does a second album. The band are now pretty seasoned musicians, and the second album more pro. The songs are still pretty conventional according to current tastes and standards, but the band's music has a unique sound and feel. It goes on like this for four more albums, over a period of five years.

By the sixth album, the band members are master musicians and a big product for the record company. They have a big budget and entirely free hand at producing their next album. They make "The Dark Side of the Moon" at Abbey Road studios, using cutting-edge technology and a producer and an engineer (Alan Parsons) who previously worked with George Martin and the Beatles.

Now consider the same four art school freaks starting a band in 2012. They play some standard stuff and some weirdly experimental tripped out stuff. They play art club parties and little low-rent underground clubs. They get a following among the local freak/artsy crowd. A record company guy's girlfriend takes him to see them. He thinks they're an interesting amateur band. He never considers trying to sell anything to this local "scene," because it's such a small demographic, and there's really not much to sell to them. He goes home. Encouraged by their fans, the band members self-fund and self-produce a studio album. They sell mp3s from it on their Myspace page. They sell some to local fans and some friends of friends and relatives. They have to work at Guitar Center or Home Depot during the day to pay their bills. They find a tiny record company to pick up their album and gets it distributed on eMusic and iTunes. It gets briefly mentioned in the "New in Indy/Alternative" section. It doesn't get any radio airplay. The only way for anyone to know about is maybe some customer put it on a shared list of favorites. A few mp3 sell, but not enough to let the band go pro. They keep on working during the day and gigging at night for a year or so. Band members drop out to go back to school or just do whatever. Five more albums aren't produced, and the "Dark Side of the Moon" never happens.

Sure, record companies are soulless, profit-driven entities, just like all other corporations. But record sales let them earn profits, which in turn let them experiment on no-name, niche industry products like Pink Floyd. That's gone now, and it was file sharing and piracy that killed it. The arts need money to thrive, and the money's just not there anymore.
Jon Engel
Machete Carbide
#24 - 2012-05-09 17:05:01 UTC
Musicians don't generally make jack-**** off of record sales. Most people refuse to buy CDs anyhow so putting music on CDs is just stupid and the music industry did not even try to put songs on digital format when piratical outlawry of the internets was doing it for free.

Sorry but a lot of artist have a few good songs and a bunch of crappy, juvenile and a-melodic ****** **** that is as offensive to the ears as a wet fart after Mexican food is to the nose. I don't want a pile of jewel cases laying around the house, either.

I also don't want to have download a bunch of software and **** to listen to it.

The Music Industry is about 10 years behind what the consumer wants. The consumer would pay for stuff, but no stuff out their that the consumer wants.
Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2012-05-09 17:58:05 UTC
Telegram Sam wrote:
[Great Wall of Text... sorry, couldn't say it shorter]

OK, consider this example:
Four art school college guys form a band. They call it "The Pink Floyd Sound." Two can actually play instruments, two are just learning. They're all usually stoned or tripping on the current varieties of experimental drugs. They put together some pretty conventional songs, by current tastes and standards. Pretty good, but nothing especially unique or groundbreaking. They get some gigs at college art school parties, little low-rent underground clubs, and other places where freaks hang out. During some of these performances, in addition to their regular set, they play free-form tripping freak-out jams that go on for half an hour at a time. Eventually the word gets out locally, among the trip-out artsy crowd, that The Pink Floyd Sound is an "experience" to do.

There's a bottom-rung operator/entrepreneur that works for a record company on commission. His girlfriend takes him to a Floyd event. He sees that these guys represent a certain niche "scene." He figures they might buy some records. He sells the record company on bringing Floyd into the studio to record some tracks with a professional producer. The record company sends records to radio stations. The operator/entrepreneur guy calls up all of his contacts at the stations and sells them on giving the songs some airplay. The songs get some modest attention and sell some records. The company brings the band back to the studio to make record a full album ("The Piper at the Gates of Dawn"). They also give the band members some cash up front to pay their rent and bills.

The album sells some copies, and one song from it gets some fairly significant airplay on local stations. It's enough that record company decides keep the band as in its stable and give them some management support. The band now has an album under its belt and it can now go semi-pro and start playing bigger venues. In a few months it goes to the studio again and does a second album. The band are now pretty seasoned musicians, and the second album more pro. The songs are still pretty conventional according to current tastes and standards, but the band's music has a unique sound and feel. It goes on like this for four more albums, over a period of five years.

By the sixth album, the band members are master musicians and a big product for the record company. They have a big budget and entirely free hand at producing their next album. They make "The Dark Side of the Moon" at Abbey Road studios, using cutting-edge technology and a producer and an engineer (Alan Parsons) who previously worked with George Martin and the Beatles.

Now consider the same four art school freaks starting a band in 2012. They play some standard stuff and some weirdly experimental tripped out stuff. They play art club parties and little low-rent underground clubs. They get a following among the local freak/artsy crowd. A record company guy's girlfriend takes him to see them. He thinks they're an interesting amateur band. He never considers trying to sell anything to this local "scene," because it's such a small demographic, and there's really not much to sell to them. He goes home. Encouraged by their fans, the band members self-fund and self-produce a studio album. They sell mp3s from it on their Myspace page. They sell some to local fans and some friends of friends and relatives. They have to work at Guitar Center or Home Depot during the day to pay their bills. They find a tiny record company to pick up their album and gets it distributed on eMusic and iTunes. It gets briefly mentioned in the "New in Indy/Alternative" section. It doesn't get any radio airplay. The only way for anyone to know about is maybe some customer put it on a shared list of favorites. A few mp3 sell, but not enough to let the band go pro. They keep on working during the day and gigging at night for a year or so. Band members drop out to go back to school or just do whatever. Five more albums aren't produced, and the "Dark Side of the Moon" never happens.

Sure, record companies are soulless, profit-driven entities, just like all other corporations. But record sales let them earn profits, which in turn let them experiment on no-name, niche industry products like Pink Floyd. That's gone now, and it was file sharing and piracy that killed it. The arts need money to thrive, and the money's just not there anymore.

I might swallow these piece of propaganda, if I weren't introduced to new and interesting bands every 2-3 weeks. New and interesting bands getting airplay on the radio, at a time when apparently the music industry is totally dead and no artists or record companies are making any money at all (well, according to the self-professed experts on this subject)


It's like you guys don't have an indy station in your countries or smth?
Or you've reached that special age where all new music is crap to your ears, if this is the case I regret to inform you the 'music industry died' when Elvis started producing records, just ask your great-granddaddy. Hell if you asked HIS great-grandaddy he'd probably tell you music died when Mozart came on the scene Lol

There should be a rather awesome pic here

Telegram Sam
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-05-09 19:04:12 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Telegram Sam wrote:
[Great Wall of Text... sorry, couldn't say it shorter] ...
I might swallow these piece of propaganda, if I weren't introduced to new and interesting bands every 2-3 weeks. New and interesting bands getting airplay on the radio, at a time when apparently the music industry is totally dead and no artists or record companies are making any money at all (well, according to the self-professed experts on this subject) It's like you guys don't have an indy station in your countries or smth? Or you've reached that special age where all new music is crap to your ears, if this is the case I regret to inform you the 'music industry died' when Elvis started producing records, just ask your great-granddaddy. Hell if you asked HIS great-grandaddy he'd probably tell you music died when Mozart came on the scene Lol
Sure there's good music out there, I find it all the time too. But that's not the point, mate. The point is you can't really say that piracy and file sharing haven't had a huge impact on the music industry. You have a product (songs or albums), and it's harder to sell units of them. Because people can just get them for free. So there's less money in the system. In the end, that means less money for the musicians-artists. Technology makes up for that some, since it allows bands to self-produce and get exposure via the internet. (There are great aspects to that, of course, because people aren't chained to big record companies. But the downside is musicians don't get the record industry backing they used to. So it's tougher to survive, and it's tougher to have a long career and do all you could have done.
Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#27 - 2012-05-09 19:53:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Astrid Stjerna
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
I'm not ignoring it, I'm calling it flimsy logic. If your CD-buying audience is (for example) 500,000 people, and 250,000 of them pirate a song instead of buying the CD, that's not one dollar, that's $250,000 in royalties that the artist doesn't recieve.


Except those numbers are stupid.

It's not 500,000 potential customers, of which 250,000 are pirates, it's more like 300,000 potential customers, 50,000 of which are pirates, and 200,000 people who will never buy your CD but might pirate it. You can't just total up the number of pirated copies and assume that each of them would have been a sale if piracy didn't exist.

Quote:
again -- at $50-$70 a pop for concert tickets, vs. free music online, who's going to win? Not the concert tickets, that's for sure


And that's just stupid. You don't go to a concert to hear the songs on the CD, you go to a concert for the experience of going to a concert. You know, hearing the band you love playing live and improvising new details on your favorite songs, signing along with thousands of your fellow fans, partying in the parking lot before the show, etc. You know, the things you can't download.

Quote:
Besides, the most common excuse I hear for downloading music online is that 'I can get the whole CD for free online, so why should I pay for it at the store?'


And again you ignore the fact that many, if not most, of the people saying that won't buy the CD anyway. They'll either pirate it, or they'll do without it. Removing piracy just removes the chance that they might buy something else in the future, like concert tickets, special edition CDs, etc.


I just want to point out that calling your opponent's logic 'stupid' isn't a very good way to make your point ;).

'Your honor, I object'.
'What's your objection?'
'Defense council is stupid'

Your argument is based on 'people go to concerts, so the impact of piracy is minimal'. I again disagree -- concerts are not 'always available', nor can everyone who likes a given band go to a concert (or afford the tickets).

For every song that's pirated, less money goes to the people that produce the music. They aren't getting royalties for the song (since it wasn't paid for), and they aren't getting paid for the CD itself (since a pirate is unlikely to buy a whole CD just for that one song).

Regardless of whether you can go to a concert or not, money is not changing hands for the stolen CD or song, and to make the balance and come out even on production costs, the artists have to raise the prices (just where do you think the money for those concerts comes from, anyway? Album sales, grasshopper...album sales).

I'm sorry, but I can't see the justification in your argument. You sound (with all due respect) like you're trying to justify piracy for its own sake.

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....

Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-05-09 20:26:06 UTC
Telegram Sam wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Telegram Sam wrote:
[Great Wall of Text... sorry, couldn't say it shorter] ...
I might swallow these piece of propaganda, if I weren't introduced to new and interesting bands every 2-3 weeks. New and interesting bands getting airplay on the radio, at a time when apparently the music industry is totally dead and no artists or record companies are making any money at all (well, according to the self-professed experts on this subject) It's like you guys don't have an indy station in your countries or smth? Or you've reached that special age where all new music is crap to your ears, if this is the case I regret to inform you the 'music industry died' when Elvis started producing records, just ask your great-granddaddy. Hell if you asked HIS great-grandaddy he'd probably tell you music died when Mozart came on the scene Lol
Sure there's good music out there, I find it all the time too. But that's not the point, mate. The point is you can't really say that piracy and file sharing haven't had a huge impact on the music industry. You have a product (songs or albums), and it's harder to sell units of them. Because people can just get them for free. So there's less money in the system. In the end, that means less money for the musicians-artists. Technology makes up for that some, since it allows bands to self-produce and get exposure via the internet. (There are great aspects to that, of course, because people aren't chained to big record companies. But the downside is musicians don't get the record industry backing they used to. So it's tougher to survive, and it's tougher to have a long career and do all you could have done.

Yeh, I see where you're coming from, and hypothetically music piracy has caused some impact to individual artists (however I'm yet to see any statements from artists to the effect of resigning due to piracy, or heard any budding musicians I know IRL state they aren't interested in a career in music due to piracy).
However I would argue that the music industry as a whole is doing quite well, and from a consumer standpoint I feel music piracy has had zero impact on the availability or quality of music being produced.

There should be a rather awesome pic here

Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2012-05-09 20:38:31 UTC
Astrid Stjerna wrote:

For every song that's pirated, less money goes to the people that produce the music. They aren't getting royalties for the song (since it wasn't paid for), and they aren't getting paid for the CD itself (since a pirate is unlikely to buy a whole CD just for that one song).

That is a blatantly false statement, you are talking about songs as if they are some sort of finite resource, or that a pirated song actually counts as some sort of negative income for the artist.
What would be correct to say is

For every song that's pirated, where the pirate would have otherwise bought the album, less money goes to the people that produce the music

OR

For every song that's pirated, the artist makes no money

OR

For every song that's pirated, the artist is recompensated in word of mouth advertising,


Also, you aren't a pirate, you're anti-piracy, you clearly DON'T empathize with the thinking of pirates, so what on earth makes you think you can make a statement on the purchasing habits of pirates? You know nothing about us or what motivates us.


btw the progression goes like this
Guy who never heard of your stuff -> pirate -> fan -> die-hard fan


Piracy is an excellent way to turn joe blow into your next insane groupie

There should be a rather awesome pic here

supr3m3justic3
Perkone
Caldari State
#30 - 2012-05-10 06:15:14 UTC
Reiisha wrote:
Wild Rho wrote:
The music industry is not some all powerful force that is the only source of music and are as subject to market forces as anything else, especially when people are perfectly capable of creating and distributing music on their own now that we have the internet.


Given laws being passed recently, they're trying to curb this development. Independant publishers usually don't have the means to compete when internet freedoms are taken away.


One of the smartest statements i have ever heard on these forums....Not only will they make it so you CANT PIRATE MEDIA, they will also tighten the freedom to DISTRIBUTE MEDIA.
Wild Rho
The Gentleman's Club
#31 - 2012-05-10 07:15:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Wild Rho
supr3m3justic3 wrote:
Reiisha wrote:
Wild Rho wrote:
The music industry is not some all powerful force that is the only source of music and are as subject to market forces as anything else, especially when people are perfectly capable of creating and distributing music on their own now that we have the internet.


Given laws being passed recently, they're trying to curb this development. Independant publishers usually don't have the means to compete when internet freedoms are taken away.


One of the smartest statements i have ever heard on these forums....Not only will they make it so you CANT PIRATE MEDIA, they will also tighten the freedom to DISTRIBUTE MEDIA.


That's plain old scaremongering and makes for a pretty weak counter point.

They're trying to curb people distributing pirated material and that is quite true but you'll have to show some good evidence that they are trying to push for laws that force independant groups to distribute through them and that they would be capable of doing so.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the people in charge of these companies would love the idea of being able to force people to go through them etc etc but that's not the reality of what's going on.


Copine Callmeknau wrote:
[quote=Astrid Stjerna]
Also, you aren't a pirate, you're anti-piracy, you clearly DON'T empathize with the thinking of pirates, so what on earth makes you think you can make a statement on the purchasing habits of pirates? You know nothing about us or what motivates us.

btw the progression goes like this
Guy who never heard of your stuff -> pirate -> fan -> die-hard fan

Piracy is an excellent way to turn joe blow into your next insane groupie


What the hell is this? People who pirate are not some sort of hive collective that think and act the same way and while he may not pirate he's in as much a position to make a statement about what pirates do and don't do as you are.

You'll get a mix of outcomes from piracy from gaining fans willing to pay for more to people who will continue to pirate what they can and pay for nothing.
Alrione
Black Lagoon Inc.
#32 - 2012-05-10 09:47:36 UTC
I'm going to echo Copine, I only buy albums that I got to like by downloading them. If it wasn't for pirating music my music knowledge would consist of 10 bands and much smaller amount of bought albums.

Pirated albums are never 100% lost sale, most of the time its people who are looking for new bands/music. This is also why services like spotify and lastfm becoming really popular. You get to discover new music without committing to pay for potentially what you wouldn't like.
Degren
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2012-05-10 11:45:06 UTC
I think it's funny that this just devolved into essentially an argument about the evils of the music industry.

Piracy includes other things, and several of the most reasonable arguments in here were completely overlooked.

Yes, the music industry sucks. We all know it. Address the piracy issue, not the evils of an overwhelmingly bloated production scene.

Hello, hello again.

Reiisha
#34 - 2012-05-11 21:43:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Reiisha
Astrid Stjerna wrote:


I'm not ignoring it, I'm calling it flimsy logic. If your CD-buying audience is (for example) 500,000 people, and 250,000 of them pirate a song instead of buying the CD, that's not one dollar, that's $250,000 in royalties that the artist doesn't recieve. Which, by the way, usually goes toward paying promoters and hiring management staff for the concert that you're arguing a pirate will attend (and again -- at $50-$70 a pop for concert tickets, vs. free music online, who's going to win? Not the concert tickets, that's for sure)'


Talking about flimsy logic...

What guarantee can you give me that if piracy was impossible, those 250,000 people would buy the CD?

I need that guarantee to make the antipiracy measures actually wortth it.

If you earn $250k with this cd and 250k people pirate it, you assume that you lose $250k in revenue.

So you implement an antipiracy measure that costs $50k.

However, all of a sudden, only 260k people buy it, rather than the 500k you assumed. You lost $40k! How is this possible? You assumed that all of those 250k filthy pirates would buy your CD if you could just protect it!


There's this age old adagio:

Assumption is the mother of all f***ups.

Alrione wrote:
I'm going to echo Copine, I only buy albums that I got to like by downloading them. If it wasn't for pirating music my music knowledge would consist of 10 bands and much smaller amount of bought albums.

Pirated albums are never 100% lost sale, most of the time its people who are looking for new bands/music. This is also why services like spotify and lastfm becoming really popular. You get to discover new music without committing to pay for potentially what you wouldn't like.


+1

And instead of learning from this to actually increase their revenue properly, the music industry goes into a panicked state and denies that they are too stupid to come up with new business models.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2012-05-11 23:00:33 UTC
People pirate for different reasons. The range scales from me understanding why to me being severely pissed. So I will not bunch them all together in judgment with some broad paint brush. So please do not paint all of us with the same broad brush stoke too.
Astenion
Zeeman Industries
The Ancients.
#36 - 2012-05-12 13:45:43 UTC
The problem with the attitude towards musicians today is that everyone believes they MUST be paid for their art simply because they created it. It's not based on merit, it's not based on actual talent, it's based on, "I created this so pay me, even if you don't like it". No. Just because you CHOSE to forgo supplemental income to support what amounts to your hobby so you can literally do nothing but sit at home and write half-ass songs on your couch doesn't mean I should pay you for it.

Someone please explain to me why musicians these days feel they must get rich from their music. It's not enough to earn a living doing what they love...no...they have to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, and if they don't, they whine and cry and **** and moan about how it's the fault of piracy. If you can make 35k per year making music, STFU. You don't HAVE to make 500k per year on your album sales. Just because you WANT to be a musician and live solely on your efforts doesn't mean you WILL.

And the studio time argument is complete BS. Spend a little money on some software for your iMac (because you know you have one already) and produce everything yourself. Then send it to a studio for mastering and split the cost between your bandmates. If you produce dubstep, this doesn't apply to you, as you should kill yourself you no-talent hack. I know unsigned bands who produce their stuff in their bedroom that sounds better than most bands who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on studio time.

Find a distribution agency and let them promote and distribute your album without having to go through a record label. You'll make much more money and will still make more than you would with a record label taking their lion's share of the pie when they don't do **** for you.

Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#37 - 2012-05-13 23:24:14 UTC
Astenion wrote:

Someone please explain to me why musicians these days feel they must get rich from their music. It's not enough to earn a living doing what they love...no...they have to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, and if they don't, they whine and cry and **** and moan about how it's the fault of piracy. If you can make 35k per year making music, STFU. You don't HAVE to make 500k per year on your album sales. Just because you WANT to be a musician and live solely on your efforts doesn't mean you WILL.


To address the earlier ad hominem about my not knowing what drives piracy: for a long, long time, I was one of you. I downloaded music from places like Napster, never thought twice about it.

And then I thought what would happen if I actually supported the artists by buying a CD. Not only do I get superior quality in terms of the audio, I'm not risking my computer with files of dubious origin, I'm not violating copyright by comitting a blatant act of theft, and I'm alos allowing the artist to continue making the CDs that help his chosen career instead of taking money out of his pocket and forcing him to churn out sub-standard songs simply because I'm greedy.

Anyway, back to Astenion's post:

No, you won't live solely on your efforts -- I know a number of musicians that have been working two (or even three) jobs for almost six years to make ends meet. What little income they do recieve is quickly eroded, however, because the cost of CD printing and duplication is outstripped by the sheer number of people that download music from a filesharing service (and don't try and pretend it's 'just one song', because when I was still downloading, I found entire albums -- and in more than one case, a band's entire discography -- available).

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....

Sup B1tches
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2012-05-14 11:56:12 UTC
Telegram Sam wrote:
Itunes has about killed musicians' ability to earn a living. No more record sales. Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine said something like: "We were lucky to come along when we did, when there was such a thing as record sales. These days, bands have to make their living off of just gig ticket sales and selling t-shirts. And without a record company behind us, nobody would have ever heard of us anyway."

Sure, there's nothing nice about record companies. But because of Itunes, they are left with zip incentive to promote quality musicians who might be innovative or different. People would just pirate their recordings, so no profit for anybody. So instead, they put all their effort and capital into gimmick acts, like Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber.


fixed.
Telegram Sam
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2012-05-15 13:29:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Telegram Sam
[Edit: Messed the post all up, not fixable, never mind, carry on]
Cyprus Black
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#40 - 2012-05-15 23:38:55 UTC
AlleyKat wrote:
I got a question.

Imagine, if you can, that piracy doesn't exist in any shape or form whatsoever. Not even bootleg copies of films and music; and certainly no copied games existed whatsoever, not even 2nd hand.

Would they cost less to buy?

AK
No, it wouldn't exist.

If you wrote and performed a few songs, you'd put them on a CD and try to sell it in a store. You'd be a musician and that's your livelyhood. If nobody bought your album because they were downloading it for free, you'd be homeless and poor in a short time.

Nobody would produce films, music, art, books, software, games or any media of any kind whatsoever because there's simply no profit in doing so. What you would have in essence is Mexico (for those who know what I'm talking about).

Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33

Previous page123Next page