Has online piracy reached a tipping point?
news.cnet.com
news.cnet.com
I'm not fussed about whether it's free or not, it's convenience that matters.
When my girlfriend and I would like to watch a movie that's no longer in cinemas, I don't care if it'll cost me a couple of euros if it only takes a few clicks to start the download, and the connection is good enough that we can watch it a few hours later. Just the fact that I don't have to look at porn ads on some torrent site ghetto would be worth money to me.
Right now, it depends on what country I happen to be in whether I can download a movie from, say, iTunes, at all. (I can't at home, certainly) But wait, I don't even want to "buy" a movie off iTunes, as that would force me to watch it within 24 hours. If I wanted to have my life scheduled by the entertainment industry, I'd watch TV.
We're finally at a point where I can buy non-DRM music if I jump through a few hoops and lie about where I live. Except of course it's easier and inexplicably costs almost the same amount of money to just order the CD from amazon. Okay, it takes 2 days to arrive, but music usually isn't as spur-of-the-moment as "let's watch a movie!" Plus, I get a nice booklet (if the artist cares enough to persuade the label to spend a few cents on presentation) and I don't have to worry about backups once the CD has fulfilled its original purpose of facilitating a rip to FLAC and moves into the CD rack, rarely to be touched again.
I don't see how they wouldn't make a killing if they sold downloadable, DRM-free movies for about €3-4, albums for, say, €4, and TV series episodes for 50 cents to 1 euro. Sure, it would destroy the industry of shops that sell DVDs, but amazon and play.com are doing that already.
Agreed. I'd pay those prices. Those are reasonable prices, and for the convenience, they would be worthwhile.
The Dutch banking sector solved it quite nicely by creating an online payment system (supported by almost all banks) that's well integrated into their online banking systems[1]. It works for the national market, but when your browsing crosses the border, you're back into the territory of the infernal credit card.
In this country, the credit card is often seen as a road to debt and as insecure. The banks' system is seen as much more trustworthy. Even if it doesn't support chargebacks, where the CC does...
I suppose that moving from no-risk piracy to risky paying is a hurdle in and of itself, even if the risk is just perceived.
[1] It's called iDEAL. It even has a Wikipedia page in English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDEAL It never ceases to amaze me how often my countrymen translate their national quirks into English...
Come to think of it, there must be a substantial market for painless pan-European payment processing. Hmm! Or has this been tried and failed many times before?
In any case, to address the micropayment angle, you could optionally pre-charge your account with a certain amount of credit and slowly use that up. I'm sure this sort of thing could be solved, given enough demand. The problem seem to be the copyright holders, though, so I have little hope.
There's also a fee associated with having a credit card here, so unless you use it a lot, it's generally hardly worth your while.
Amazon either completely ignores the Dutch market or it doesn't get a foot in the door. amazon.nl redirects to amazon.co.uk. There is a Dutch competitor[1] that's pretty big here. Before iDEAL they just worked around the whole credit card mess by sending bills[2].
> Come to think of it, there must be a substantial market for painless pan-European payment processing. Hmm! Or has this been tried and failed many times before?
There has been a very small scare here that a system like that (in the context of the Single Euro Payments Area[3]) might supersede the local iDEAL system by an inferior system. I'm not aware of any previous attempts on pan-European payment systems. There have been some attempts on the Dutch national market before iDEAL, but most of them failed (presumably because if it doesn't have the support of all major banks, the market will end up fragmented).
[1] Bol.com
[2] The Dutch "acceptgiro", you just fill in your account number (if that hasn't been done already), sign it and send it to your bank. Surprisingly, there isn't an English Wikipedia page for it :-)
Saying something in the newspapers doesn't make it true. Those industries are going the way of the dodo, whether they want to or not.
The general population is learning how broad, expansive, and one-sided copyright law has become. Learning the extent that governments are on the payroll of big media corporations and how the laws, treaties, and enforcement are largely to protect thier bottom line.
People think it's absurd to be sued for signing happy birthday or reading a book outloud to their child.
When did that happen?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090210/1014293724.shtml
Either are actually crimes, punishable with 5years and/or $250,000 per incident. Since copyright violations are one of the few civil matters that the government has been conned into making illegal. But you are extremely unlikely to be prosecuted. Unlike restaurants (bday) and Amazon ("performing" a book).
> Does this mean that everyone who warbles "Happy Birthday to You" to family members at birthday parties is engaging in copyright infringement if they fail to obtain permission from or pay royalties to the song's publisher? No. Royalties are due, of course, for commercial uses of the song, such as playing or singing it for profit, using it in movies, television programs, and stage shows, or incorporating it into musical products such as watches and greeting cards; as well, royalties are due for public performance, defined by copyright law as performances which occur "at a place open to the public, or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered." So, crooning "Happy Birthday to You" to family members and friends at home is fine, but performing a copyrighted work in a public setting such as a restaurant or a sports arena technically requires a license from ASCAP or the Harry Fox Agency (although such infringements are rarely prosecuted).
That's what I wanted to know. Actually, I wanted to know about people being sued over singing "Happy Birthday to You" to their child, but I suppose the answer is more or less given in the fragment I just cited.
Your other link is about the Amazon Kindle. Hardly a parent reading a book out loud to their child. It's followed by some highly opined speculation that you can't read a book to your child, but that's not a source of somebody being sued for reading a book to their child.
I suppose that also didn't happen, since it would be more or less the same as singing "Happy Birthday to You" to your child, which your source Snopes already said was okay.