3 ms·

> Especially where it mattered most, removing pirated copies of my books from Google search results. Make your books available for free, and you won't have thi

by drnick1 10mo ago

> Especially where it mattered most, removing pirated copies of my books from Google search results. Make your books available for free, and you won't have this problem. You can't expect people to pay for something that literally costs nothing once it has been created. You may also sell paper versions. Some people like myself enjoy reading paper better and will pay for hard copy if they like the book enough or expect to refer to it often.

bryanrasmussen 10mo ago
>You can't expect people to pay for something that literally costs nothing once it has been created. See these carrots! it doesn't cost anything to create them now, because they've already been created haven't they! Once the oil has been extracted from the ground, and transported to the gas station and put in the tank, it doesn't cost anything to pump it!! Why are we paying for this stuff again!?!? You can't expect people to pay for code you know, it doesn't cost anything!
- Kon5ole 10mo ago
  I get your reaction, authors should of course be paid, but GP has a point. If the same payment model that is applied to books and music were applied to carrots, it would be illegal to plant carrots. If you think about it like that it's obviously wrong. The carrots in your example would be similar to the printed books the GP mentioned, not the text itself.
  - bryanrasmussen 10mo ago
    either that or it would be illegal to pick carrots from farms you didn't own, depending on how you wanted to construct the analogy. Of course I can agree that there are differences between these things, but the average writer earns less than the average programmer, and for this reason I often feel it is somewhat gauche that many programmers seem offended by how writers earn money and want it stopped, without any good suggestion as to how they should earn money otherwise. It's like when rich people complain that janitors get food stamps to survive, it motivates my sarcasm gland.
hermitcrab 10mo ago
>You can't expect people to pay for something that literally costs nothing once it has been created. So how are software developers, authors and musicians supposed to make a living?
- drnick1 10mo ago
  Authors and musicians, unless they are extremely successful, don't make a living from royalties. Income mostly comes from live performances and merchandise. As for software development, the open source model clearly shows that money can be made. Also, most software out there isn't actually distributed and is internal to a business or company.
  - hermitcrab 10mo ago
    Authors who are not extremely successful get their income from live performances and merchandise, not royaties? Any authors here care to comment? >As for software development, the open source model clearly shows that money can be made Ok, so I sell data wrangling software for Windows and Mac for $99 per license. Mostly to people who aren't programmers. Kindly tell me how that would work with an open source model.
    - drnick1 10mo ago
      > Kindly tell me how that would work with an open source model. Even without copyright, nothing prevents your from selling software. Chances are people who don't want to pay for your software already don't. If paying for software adds value otherwise (such as access to updates and support), people will still pay for it.
  - Mashimo 10mo ago
    > the open source model clearly shows that money can be made. Does it?
    - hermitcrab 10mo ago
      I know lots of professional Indie software developers. I can't think of a single one that uses an open source model.
didgetmaster 10mo ago
Is it just books that you expect to be free? Or does your advice apply to every song, painting, movie, and program? You expect every artist, actor, painter, and programmer to make zero $ from anything they create?
- drnick1 10mo ago
  I think that copyright should be abolished. But this does not mean you can't make money off software. For example, game studios could still charge for online play on their servers (an ongoing service), even if they can't legally prevent people from sharing copies of the game files, in this model. Similarly, theaters could still charge for movies, but what they would be selling is not a "right to see the movie" per se but the theater experience. It may be hard to imagine, I don't think things would be massively different overall.
  - hermitcrab 10mo ago
    >It may be hard to imagine, I don't think things would be massively different overall. Apart from all the millions of people like me (an Indie software developer) that would suddenly have 0 income from their digital products? Or are you just trolling for a reaction?
  - a_t48 10mo ago
    How would that work for single player games?
    - drnick1 10mo ago
      If the game is reasonably priced, people may still buy it out of convenience. For example, I'd rather pay $5 for a single player game on Steam and get out-of-the-box support for Linux through Proton than download a possibly malware-ridden copy in the high seas and then spent time figuring out how to run it. It's the same reason people still buy hard copies when every conceivable book is on Anna's Archive.
- prmoustache 10mo ago
fwipsy 10mo ago
Stubbed your toe? If you cut off your leg you won't have that problem. Even if he offers it for free others may still try to collect money for his work. If he sells paper copies other printers could undercut him.
Kon5ole 10mo ago
I agree that it is probably impossible to maintain the economy around selling copies of a work when those copies are practically free, but making your works actually free in the current business models is giving up too soon. There needs to be a transition from making money from unit sales to something else, and until that's sorted out I think having piracy being at least stigmatized for being wrong makes sense. I think it's important for a creator to ensure that the experience for those who want to pay is as good as possible. Apart from that I don't think any amount of worry will help very much.

by drnick1 10mo ago

bryanrasmussen 10mo ago

>You can't expect people to pay for something that literally costs nothing once it has been created. See these carrots! it doesn't cost anything to create them now, because they've already been created haven't they! Once the oil has been extracted from the ground, and transported to the gas station and put in the tank, it doesn't cost anything to pump it!! Why are we paying for this stuff again!?!? You can't expect people to pay for code you know, it doesn't cost anything!

Kon5ole 10mo ago
I get your reaction, authors should of course be paid, but GP has a point. If the same payment model that is applied to books and music were applied to carrots, it would be illegal to plant carrots. If you think about it like that it's obviously wrong. The carrots in your example would be similar to the printed books the GP mentioned, not the text itself.
- bryanrasmussen 10mo ago
  either that or it would be illegal to pick carrots from farms you didn't own, depending on how you wanted to construct the analogy. Of course I can agree that there are differences between these things, but the average writer earns less than the average programmer, and for this reason I often feel it is somewhat gauche that many programmers seem offended by how writers earn money and want it stopped, without any good suggestion as to how they should earn money otherwise. It's like when rich people complain that janitors get food stamps to survive, it motivates my sarcasm gland.

hermitcrab 10mo ago

>You can't expect people to pay for something that literally costs nothing once it has been created. So how are software developers, authors and musicians supposed to make a living?

drnick1 10mo ago
Authors and musicians, unless they are extremely successful, don't make a living from royalties. Income mostly comes from live performances and merchandise. As for software development, the open source model clearly shows that money can be made. Also, most software out there isn't actually distributed and is internal to a business or company.
- hermitcrab 10mo ago
  Authors who are not extremely successful get their income from live performances and merchandise, not royaties? Any authors here care to comment? >As for software development, the open source model clearly shows that money can be made Ok, so I sell data wrangling software for Windows and Mac for $99 per license. Mostly to people who aren't programmers. Kindly tell me how that would work with an open source model.
  - drnick1 10mo ago
    > Kindly tell me how that would work with an open source model. Even without copyright, nothing prevents your from selling software. Chances are people who don't want to pay for your software already don't. If paying for software adds value otherwise (such as access to updates and support), people will still pay for it.
- Mashimo 10mo ago
  > the open source model clearly shows that money can be made. Does it?
  - hermitcrab 10mo ago
    I know lots of professional Indie software developers. I can't think of a single one that uses an open source model.

didgetmaster 10mo ago

Is it just books that you expect to be free? Or does your advice apply to every song, painting, movie, and program? You expect every artist, actor, painter, and programmer to make zero $ from anything they create?

drnick1 10mo ago
I think that copyright should be abolished. But this does not mean you can't make money off software. For example, game studios could still charge for online play on their servers (an ongoing service), even if they can't legally prevent people from sharing copies of the game files, in this model. Similarly, theaters could still charge for movies, but what they would be selling is not a "right to see the movie" per se but the theater experience. It may be hard to imagine, I don't think things would be massively different overall.
- hermitcrab 10mo ago
  >It may be hard to imagine, I don't think things would be massively different overall. Apart from all the millions of people like me (an Indie software developer) that would suddenly have 0 income from their digital products? Or are you just trolling for a reaction?
- a_t48 10mo ago
  How would that work for single player games?
  - drnick1 10mo ago
    If the game is reasonably priced, people may still buy it out of convenience. For example, I'd rather pay $5 for a single player game on Steam and get out-of-the-box support for Linux through Proton than download a possibly malware-ridden copy in the high seas and then spent time figuring out how to run it. It's the same reason people still buy hard copies when every conceivable book is on Anna's Archive.
prmoustache 10mo ago

fwipsy 10mo ago

Stubbed your toe? If you cut off your leg you won't have that problem. Even if he offers it for free others may still try to collect money for his work. If he sells paper copies other printers could undercut him.

Kon5ole 10mo ago

I agree that it is probably impossible to maintain the economy around selling copies of a work when those copies are practically free, but making your works actually free in the current business models is giving up too soon. There needs to be a transition from making money from unit sales to something else, and until that's sorted out I think having piracy being at least stigmatized for being wrong makes sense. I think it's important for a creator to ensure that the experience for those who want to pay is as good as possible. Apart from that I don't think any amount of worry will help very much.