5 ms·

It's not all about costs. In music there are many people who love to write and record songs for fun. This devalues music regardless of costs. In fact I think mo

by rjprins 16y ago

It's not all about costs. In music there are many people who love to write and record songs for fun. This devalues music regardless of costs. In fact I think most music in itself is practically worthless. It's the face and name of musicians which are worth money, usually because of successful marketing. For books it's a little different. Few people write long stories for fun and it's much harder to write a good book then it is to make a good song. Thus, there are not that many good books around and their value is higher. In this case, I would say copying is bad. However, my own opinion is that the world just has to adapt to it's own developments. Copying is easy? Writers get less money for their books? Then writers will have to change their profession. Sometimes markets shrink or disappear.

tjr 16y ago
Few people write long stories for fun and it's much harder to write a good book then it is to make a good song. Probably. It might be more equivalent to compare a book with a whole album, or a chapter with a song. I'm not sure what quality of music you have in mind, or what quality of book, but I don't think writing good prose is of necessity significantly more difficult than producing good recorded music. Sometimes markets shrink or disappear. Certainly. But when markets disappear because the producers in the market say "I would like X dollars in exchange for this product" and the consumers say "No, we'd rather violate copyright law and procure your product free of charge", it seems to me that something is going on beyond the simple disappearance of a market. Consumers still want recorded music, and written prose, and all sorts of things that are easy to copy. Many of them just don't feel compelled to give the producers anything in exchange for their work [if they can avoid doing so]. Their work must have value, or else the consumers wouldn't want it.
- bandushrew 16y ago
  If their work is of sufficiently high value that the consumer is willing to pay for it, then it will survive. isn't that capitalism 101?
  - tjr 16y ago
    In a traditional model, if the consumer is not willing to pay for the product, then they don't get it. With digital products, consumers have the (possibly illegal, unauthorized) option of getting a copy free of charge from someone other than the producer. If consumer is willing to pay for the product, and if the producer is not authorizing copies of it, then the consumer (in theory) ought not get the product. But yet they are getting the product, because they are sidestepping the producers copyright.

by rjprins 16y ago

tjr 16y ago

Few people write long stories for fun and it's much harder to write a good book then it is to make a good song. Probably. It might be more equivalent to compare a book with a whole album, or a chapter with a song. I'm not sure what quality of music you have in mind, or what quality of book, but I don't think writing good prose is of necessity significantly more difficult than producing good recorded music. Sometimes markets shrink or disappear. Certainly. But when markets disappear because the producers in the market say "I would like X dollars in exchange for this product" and the consumers say "No, we'd rather violate copyright law and procure your product free of charge", it seems to me that something is going on beyond the simple disappearance of a market. Consumers still want recorded music, and written prose, and all sorts of things that are easy to copy. Many of them just don't feel compelled to give the producers anything in exchange for their work [if they can avoid doing so]. Their work must have value, or else the consumers wouldn't want it.

bandushrew 16y ago
If their work is of sufficiently high value that the consumer is willing to pay for it, then it will survive. isn't that capitalism 101?
- tjr 16y ago
  In a traditional model, if the consumer is not willing to pay for the product, then they don't get it. With digital products, consumers have the (possibly illegal, unauthorized) option of getting a copy free of charge from someone other than the producer. If consumer is willing to pay for the product, and if the producer is not authorizing copies of it, then the consumer (in theory) ought not get the product. But yet they are getting the product, because they are sidestepping the producers copyright.