Comments on: Authors are the only ones to see the fairer side of copyright

By: T2A`

T2A` — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:24:40 +0000

Here's a pretty damning exmaple of how fucked up things are in the music business. 4.6 million albums sold = $0

By: William (green)

William (green) — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:26:06 +0000

Ed: While Pandora may be closed to the outside world, a simple proxy can get you back on it again. As an American in Japan, that’s what I’ve done.
The radio here blows so hard…

By: drinian

drinian — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:32:46 +0000

Yep, that’s why the Crunchyroll no-DRM experiment is so interesting.

It’s just like how I started buying music downloads after Amazon started selling high-quality MP3s (for significantly less than physical CDs, to boot).

By: Cyde Weys

Cyde Weys — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:33:44 +0000

When you think of it, DRM really is a moral hazard. A corporation would have strong incentive to change the DRM system every five years or so, destroying everyone’s “purchased” goods and requiring the expenditure of more money on the newest version of the exact same thing. And they could get away with it by “justifying” it with new features. “Ohhh, all of your previous 720p downloads that became unusable when we killed the DRM system? You wouldn’t want them anyway! Now we sell ‘em under a new DRM system in 1080p format with additional bonus content! Spend spend spend!!!”

By: Cyde Weys

Cyde Weys — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:05:16 +0000

drinian: I'm with you on the digital download, with one huge caveat that I'm sure you share as well: they must not be encumbered by Digital Restrictions Management. That's an absolute dealbreaker for me. First of it, it likely wouldn't even be supported in my current desktop OS (DRM in GNU/Linux? Fat chance!), so it would be worthless to me anyway. But even if it was somehow supported, it'd be a terrible deal, as it would represent less value than DVDs, which are at least guaranteed to be playable indefinitely (so long as the media survives, or as long as any backups you've made of it survive). All of the big DRM systems currently require a server in the mix, and if a distribution company goes bankrupt and takes a chunk of my downloaded anime with it, or simply feels like discontinuing it at a whim, I'd be righteously furious.

By: drinian

drinian — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:01:27 +0000

Cyde — perhaps social contract wasn’t written enough in my first post. “Legitimacy” can only be given to fansubs insomuch as they enable an audience who — because of DVD region encoding or lack of Japanese TV transmitters in the United States or simple language barriers — cannot easily view a copyrighted work through legitimate channels. This is perhaps why little legal action, outside of the Media Factory issue, has been taken against them, and I doubt little will be until those official channels open up. Likewise, many of the higher-profile fansub groups do suspend distribution after a show has been licensed for R1 (Australians remain resentful, I’m sure).

The future is in digital downloads, though. Whenever I buy CDs or DVDs these days, I just think about the waste of fossil fuels that went into packaging and distribution. As regards anime in particular, it seems like Gonzo’s leading the way, having offered a couple of their new series this spring for simultaneous release via download in America on Crunchyroll. Free streaming, pay what you feel is appropriate for a Divx download. I might start using it myself once they move to H.264 + .mkv for soft subs.

By: Ed

Ed — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:33:48 +0000

I read once (don’t remember where) that in the 19th century most artists (musicians, magicians, actors) would act on fairgrounds. They would convince somebody with a tent to let them act inside, then the public would get in, watch the show and if they liked it they would pay whatever they wanted at the exit.
The tent owner would get a percentage of the amount, which would be agreed beforehand.
Nowadays, the internet gives the “spectators” the same power they once had, you really only have to pay for what you really like… You watch it on the internet first and if you like it you go out and buy it.
My point here is that the artists could easily cut the middleman and get more money. For example, suppose I download an enjoy some music album; if I go out and try to buy it it would cost me something like £15, out of which, if the artist is lucky and actually has a good deal, £1 goes to him/her. I would be quite happier to just click a paypal button on the artist’s website and give him/her £5. Unfortunately most artists (with some notable exceptions) are not setup this way and have not grasped how they can get away from the mainstream industry.
I, for once, have discovered my most valued artists on pandora.com (before it was forced to close to the outside US world) so I’m not even influenced anymore by the relentless promoting (on the radio, tv, etc) by the industry of the minority of artists they think are “sellable”.
Things will change eventually and I hope that most artists will get a better income in the future.

By: Cyde Weys

Cyde Weys — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:24:23 +0000

Yes, I suspect it is fair to say that we programmers see the fairer side of copyright. Especially for anyone doing Free Software stuff — and even more especially for people who prefer the GPL over the BSDL (like me). I’ve been running GNU/Linux as my desktop OS for over a month now and I haven’t felt any need for any proprietary program. Granted, all of my game playing has shifted over to the Nintendo DS (I used to play at least some games on the computer). But whatever.

On the anime issue, I don’t see the legitimacy of the “unlicensed” argument at all. Copyright doesn’t give a damn whether a work is licensed in your particular country of residence or not. And it also leads to weird situations, where a series is picked up in America and suddenly all of the fansubs people considered were “okay” are now “not okay”. I’ll stick to my method: buying anime and downloading anime in roughly equal proportions, regardless of any licenses. Yeah, I’m not paying for everything I’m watching, but then again, I do pay for stuff I don’t end up watching, and in the end, I figure they’re making more than enough money off me compared to the average fan, so I really don’t feel bad about it.

By: drinian

drinian — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:11:02 +0000

Can we expand on this to say that programmers also see the fairer side of copyright?

Most of us do work-for-hire, but, after all, copyright law is essential to the GPL and the resale of commercial software. More than any other industry, we create imaginary property. (Incidentally, that “we” is important, and part of why work-for-hire happens — it’s often much easier to produce a written work with only one author than it is for a musical or cinematic work).

It’s perhaps for this reason that I am more hesitant than most to dismiss copyright protection in other industries; I know far too many people who don’t hold up their end of the social contract when it comes to anime fansubs vs. official licenses, for instance, even when they have more than enough money to do so. (Of course, the industry needs to understand that it is really a social contract and make some accommodations of their own, but that’s a whole other issue).

By: Cyde Weys

Cyde Weys — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 19:20:29 +0000

Hrmm, so it looks like the truth is between the two extremes then. It does sound like the book publishing industry generally gives better deals to its creative talent than the other two mentioned, then.

By: heather (errantdreams)

heather (errantdreams) — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:46:00 +0000

Kelly—You’re only going to be signing over full copyright to the publisher if you’re with a VERY disreputable publisher. Otherwise you’ll have to do some sort of exclusivity deal for a period of time or in certain formats, but you should never be signing over your copyright.

Unless, of course, you’re referring to ‘work for hire’ arrangements, but that’s a different animal altogether than writing novels, stories, etc. and shopping them around. Any publisher demanding copyright for work that a writer independently developed and produced should be avoided at all costs—and reported to those writers’ organizations that keep lists of such companies and warn their writers away from them.

By: Kelly Martin

Kelly Martin — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 04:08:43 +0000

Ah, too bad you’re wrong about this. It’s quite common for authors to have to sign over the full copyright of a work to a publisher in order to get the work published. Sure, the shining luminaries don’t have to; people like J.K. Rowling are in a position to dictate terms, but she’s the exception, not the rule. Even if the copyright formally retains in the hands of the author, it’s subject to an exclusive licensing arrangement that is essentially nonterminatable by the author, or only terminatable under very limited conditions, and is basically works out the same as the situation that exists in the music and movie industries.