6 ms·
> As a buyer, why would I buy an iTunes movie from someone else and not from iTunes? Because it is the same thing, but cheaper. > And as a seller, why would I
by chucksmash 4y ago
> As a buyer, why would I buy an iTunes movie from someone else and not from iTunes?
Because it is the same thing, but cheaper.
> And as a seller, why would I sell it at a lower price than what it is on iTunes?
Because otherwise people won't buy it from you, they'll buy it from ITunes.
Even if the lower price doesn't make sense for digital media that aren't degraded through use, lower price (that lets you recoup, say, 90% of what you paid) would be needed to make people go through hassle of not just buying it "new."
- Avicebron 4y agoTrue, and if the market economy was working as it should. Then if enough people were selling old digital music at lower prices, Itunes would have to lower their prices. Essentially what their doing is anti-competitive.
- adrianN 4y agoYou could even imagine an automated system where you buy a song for some two cents and then sell it back after you're done listening to it for a one cent. You could have users make their collections available on a market place and pay them some fraction of the profits you make.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- scarface74 4y agoMusic bought on iTunes hasn’t had DRM since 2009
- mattl 4y agoDepends where you’re based. Japan had DRM on iTunes for some time and also DRM-free songs on iTunes were a paid upgrade globally for a while too.
- terinjokes 4y agoThe ability to upgrade was only available for songs purchaseable as DRM-free on iTunes. I still have tracks in my library with the DRM because the distributor went out of business, making it impossible to upgrade.
- mattl 4y agoOh wow. Which tracks?
- terinjokes 4y agoOn Linux nowadays, but last time I was on macOS with iTunes I has an album of Australian folk rock that still had DRM, were still an old bitrate, and not upgradeable to "Plus" (yes, the thing from 2007) or DRM-free.
- mattl 4y agoIIRC, Plus was DRM-free.
- terinjokes 4y agoYeah, was so long ago I couldn't remember if they were separate or not.
- mattl 4y agoI think most were but also as I mentioned elsewhere on this page, Japan and possibly other countries didn’t go DRM-free for some time so possibly they had iTunes Plus but with DRM.
- antoinec 4y agoI'd be curious to see if a system like that exists already for some kind of digital asset: secondary sales for something that is not limited in quantity, and can still be bought from the source at a higher price.
- carlgreene 4y agoVST plug-ins have a pretty robust secondary marketplace. See kvraudio.com
- apetresc 4y agoCertain NFT marketplaces have this characteristic.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- LegitShady 4y ago@antoinec steam does exactly this. you can sell on steam and pay steam their cut, or sell steam keys elsewhere for the same or more money without steam taking a cut.
- shockeychap 4y agoThe only problem with this is that with physical media, there's an intrinsic amount of "friction" that prevents gaming the system. It's not convenient to, for example, have five people buy and share one set of DVDs. The hassle of moving the disc around (which gets dramatically worse with distance) incentivizes people to buy their own copy. But digital buying and selling would make it rather easy for one person to "sell" their movie to a friend for next-to-nothing and then "buy" it back when they want to use it. And we can be a thousand miles away with no problem. There are ways to correct this, such as imposing reasonable floors on the sale price, or not permitting the sale of a title for something like 30 days after a transaction. I'm just saying that these things would need to be factored into any proper solution, ideally via legislation.
- frankfrankfrank 4y agoThe friction you are overlooking would be, e.g., the platform to sell the media and the likely cost to do so. Not only that, but you are also not aware of the fraudulent price that is charged for the media now precisely because the market is a monopolistic fraud. If movies were priced at what they are really worth, they would be some … and easily significantly … lower lower price, e.g., $.50 rent and $2 to buy. If you want to evaluate how much the movies/content is really worth, just take the price you pay for a streaming service and divide it by the content you consume. For example; $5 month, divided by 80 hours of viewing (which seems low for most) and you come to $0.06 per hour, or about $0.12 per movie. Using this conservative estimate, are you going to bother selling a digital movie for less than $0.12? No. But that is precisely why the industry has monopolized the market and added DRM, because they want to keep their fraudulent scheme going to deprive people of their earnings. But what it’s really about is, as instituting a new form of slavery where you are given everything for “free” just like like slave of all other eras, but you are deprived of far more at a far greater intangible cost for it.
- necovek 4y agoLoaning a copy to a friend, which is what your example basically is, should also be protected by consumer laws.
- 4y ago