Comment by CamperBob2
13 years ago
(Shrug) The money TPB is "diverting" is money that the content industry refuses to accept from its would-be customers.
It's the industry's job to ask me what distribution channel I want to use, not dictate what channel they require me to use. When they figure that out, they'll start making money again.
No. It's their content; they make the rules. It's the industry's job to use whatever distribution channels make them and their clients the most money. That's it.
If you don't like it, you don't have to buy their content, but it doesn't give you the right to bootleg it.
If a content maker doesn't like it, they don't have to use a big publishing house that restricts their sales avenues, but they also know they're probably going to make less money that way.
(Shrug) They can make rules, or they can make money. Their call.
You can boycott them if you disagree with them, but you can't just boycott them while still enjoying their content via piracy. It's not morally sound.
1 reply →
I don't think your viewpoint is fit for dignified public discourse. It's theft. It's not a new, modern crime, with deep implications still being processed by moral intuitions, legislatures, and courts. When something becomes easy to steal, it doesn't become less of a theft.
2 replies →
I agree with you that it's not right to bootleg their content anyway, but I also think there is little hope of persuading most people of that. So the content producers are going to have to change their business models.
And I'm not sure they'll come out much worse for it. Imagine if Peter Jackson announced that his next movie would be a free download, and crowdfunded the money to make it. I bet he could raise a couple hundred million dollars without much trouble.
But the Hobbit just made a billion dollars in the box office alone. (And it cost around 200 million to make.) Peter Jackson has no reason to buck the system.