3 ms·
Maybe one difference is that libraries don't operate for profit, while pirate sites display ads and (as far as I know) don't redistribute any profits to the con
by sgdesign 14y ago
Maybe one difference is that libraries don't operate for profit, while pirate sites display ads and (as far as I know) don't redistribute any profits to the content creators?
Although I would gladly pay $X/month to TPB if it did give some of it back to the artists.
- orng 14y agoIt would be very interesting to see what happened if TPB were to start distributing their revenue to the rights-holders without asking for their permission though. Maybe it could work in a similar vein to flattr, where the recipients have to claim their money? Perhaps the future of torrents is a Spotify-like model where anyone can upload anything, and if you can prove that you are the owner of something you get your share of the revenue? edit: minor change to phrasing
- muuh-gnu 14y ago> if it did give some of it back to the artists. I'd guess they would if they legally could. But if they could, everybody else also could, and then the cash cow of "selling copies" would finally die in an era where everybody can produce copies themselves. Therefore they cant, because the current stakeholders have too much power in legislation.