Hacker News Reader

Comment by DanBC | Hacker News Reader

You kickstart something because you want to help them make it, not because you want a product in return.

While you could strip the copy protections that's a crime.

That's disingenuous. I am well aware that a Kickstarter pledge is not the same thing as a pre-order -- the project might fail, circumstances might change, etc. However, the $35 tier specifies that "You will receive a digital version of the movie within a few days of the movie's theatrical debut". I assume @b3b0p pledged an amount within that tier. Unless that assumption is wrong, the complaint is justified, at least morally and maybe legally.

Exactly, I supported the movie and I am glad I did, but I would not have done the amount I did had I known that the digital copy was going to be this Ultra Violet version. I would have pledged less or possibly pledged more to get the Blu-ray.

In the back of my mind I feared that the digital copy would be Ultra Violet. It was a gamble and understand it was a risk, that I ended up losing. I would buy the iTunes or Blu-ray now, but I don't want to spend more on a movie.

I agree that the tier rewards are dishonest and are morally and ethically wrong.

But "do not use Kickstarter as a shop or as a pre order platform" was reasonably common before the veronica mars kickstarter; the changes to tier rewards was before the VM kickstarter (and perhaps Kickstarter needs to implement another change to prevent people offering things they cannot provide).

We need to keep repeating the message that tier rewards are just suggestions of what you might get, maybe, possibly, and that there are many reasons why you might not get that product.

I'm not sure what is unclear about, "If you donate X, you will receive Y." That's not a simple donation, it's a pre-order.

That's right! I mean there are a lot of people who are considering Kickstarter as a charity. It's not a charity!

It's a funding platform and of course funding does come with the risks of projects failing, founders running away with the money. But, it certainly doesn't have to be a free lunch giveaway as in, "Hey, you wanna start a product/company and be a millionaire? Great! Take my $100 and make merry! No no, I don't want anything in return, I am just doing charity". No thank you sir! If I have to do charity, I know where the drop boxes are.

It is very clear. It is also dishonest.

That's a serious problem with Kickstarter - they allow groups to offer tiers that appear to be pre-orders and do nothing when those pre-orders are not delivered.

Kickstarter isn't going to stop doing this despite all the criticism. So people need to keep reminding everyone that tier rewards are menaingless. Maybe you'll get the reward, maybe you won't, but you don't back a project for the reward but because you want to see the project succeed.

Repeating this message may make kickstarter stop projects being dishonest with reward tiers.

It will also cause a significantly lower amount of investment into the site, projects, and overall would decrease the number of fees collected. So it ain't happening.

It's not quite a pre-order. You explicitly bear part of the risk, so you're an investor. But you invest in exchange for the end-product, rather than equity.

I help kick start something because I see that their idea is good and they need funding to convert that idea into a product. It's like I am being an investor, so the least they can do is give me a product if not a long time share as is the case with real investors and all.

So, no I am not doing charity on kick starter and if that's what Kickstarter is about, this charity, then it's basically flawed! I don't think I am asking for much! Idea of free lunch is unacceptable to me and I just hope that's not what Kickstarter is about.

There are non-profit ventures that I've supported on Kickstarter and IndieGoGo and I have never wanted anything in return. That's an entirely different story.

If I back something, I want the product they promised given they didn't fail. If they failed, I am fine with it and I wish them luck w/o any expectations that they would return my money.

It's crime only in retarded countries.

Defeating copyright protection measures is a crime in many countries - EU, US, Canada, etc etc.

BTW: Retard is a pointless insult. The people you are calling retard don't care. But the people who have learning disability do care - language like this continues to be used to oppress those people, to the point that even when adjusted for illness they die earlier than the general population because of discrimination.

Please consider using a better insult.

"It's only a crime in fucking stupid countries", perhaps?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com