PDA

View Full Version : selling content not media


deviousterran
6th March 2006, 07:33
i wrote this essay for school a while ago, but i thought it belonged here too. this site is concerned with the ongoing struggle of copyright... rights, right? enjoy:


We have a problem and its called money. The RIAA and the MPAA want money from us, the consumers, and we, the consumer, want to spend as little money as possible while still getting as much content as possible. So, when the MPAA and the RIAA (henceforth to be known as MAA, generalized into the Media Association of America) realize that piracy is taking a big chunk out of their profit, they sue these naughty pirates. Well, I have a better plan that will make the consumers happy (and hopefully decrease piracy) and put more money (and power) into the MAA.

The thing that scares me the most right now is HD-DVD and BLU-Ray technology. The problem is not that its coming out, the problem is that suddenly I have a whole bunch of outdated media that is suddenly worthless. The same thing happened to all those tapes and records my parents have. The solution is simple, but requires a major political and economical paradigm shift: don’t sell the media; sell the rights to the ideas contained on the media (whether it be a movie, a song or picture). After all, the media itself is worthless, some plastic stamped with precision that can hold bits of data. But when the data is arranged into a certain way it represents countless hours of time and effort that the creators have spent creating a idea. And that idea is what we are purchasing.

The major problem is simply one of control. How is one supposed to control the distribution of ideas? I see two possible solutions: government control, or private control. In the case of government control, a single entity (presumably the MAA) would control the database that tells who has the rights to which idea. Users would simply register with the MAA and give all their information (the government has it anyways). Then every time a user would buy media, that media would be registered with the MAA. Then if the user ever needs another copy of the media (in any format thus negating the need for copy protection and copying) he or she could simply order it from the company at the cost of shipping and the cost of the media it was printed on (probably no more than $5). Or the user would have the right to transfer the media into whatever format he or she wishes as long as the content reamins intact. It would be more difficult for a private company to manage this task because it would have to work for everyone and for every type of media. A company would also be expected to turn a profit, which could then lead to cost inflation, which is our current problem anyways.

Creating a system like this would be a truly massive undertaking needing support for every interested party. However every party has something to gain from this as long as they are honorable and not money-grubbing thieves (I’m looking at you MAA). First, the consumer would gain from this by not having to pay increasingly high amounts of money for content they already own. They would simply be expected to reimburse the company for the cost of the supplies in manufacturing the materials used to store the content. Secondly, and content provider will gain because of the decreased amount of piracy which they claim is eating up so much of their profit. Next, the MAA will gain because by creating this database they will become a very powerful political entity; with control over the information of every person who owns media in the US. Not to mention the extra funding that the content providers and the taxpayers will pour into their offices in order to keep the MAA functioning. lastly, the artist will be awarded the money that is rightfully theirs (its not right for me to pay the artist 3 times for the same cd because i scratch/loose/break it, is it?)

There are of course major issues with this idea. Right off the bat I see that privacy will be a big issue, right along with enforcement. And what about all the media we currently own? There should be a way to register that too. The point is that I think this could work, but I have made all the innovations I can make without the input of others. It needs a lot more work.

maybe its stupid, maybe its not, what do you guys think?

setarip_old
6th March 2006, 07:54
Hi!

A brave attempt at creating a new perspective. Kudos to you ;>}

However, after a cursory review of your paper, one item jumps out at me. You state, "Then if the user ever needs another copy of the media (in any format thus negating the need for copy protection and copying) he or she could simply order it from the company at the cost of shipping and the cost of the media it was printed on (probably no more than $5)."

Presently, with little extra effort to circumvent copy protection, I can make a backup copy of my purchased commercial DVDs for approximately 30 cents each - or $2.00 each, if I choose to make a 1:1 copy on DL media.

Therefore, I would ask, where in your proposed program is the incentive to me, the consumer?

The thing that scares me the most right now is HD-DVD and BLU-Ray technology. The problem is not that its coming out, the problem is that suddenly I have a whole bunch of outdated media that is suddenly worthless.You needn't worry. From what I've read, the new systems will be backward compatible...

BTW - referring to a "paradigm shift" as being "major" is redundant ;>}

Hellworm
6th March 2006, 12:57
The Problem I see is that this is only a new selling strategy ( a very good idea btw), but the problem with copy protection and piracy stays exactly the same. This thing is more friendly to people consuming, but again, if your are a pirate, you can get everything much cheaper.

deviousterran
8th March 2006, 22:27
while it is true that making your own copies will be cheaper (and legal under this change), the purpose of obtaining a new copy would actually replace the retail copy without paying the retail price again. i'm not sure how others feel, but i prefer to have the fill retail copy with all the fancy pictures and printing. also, this system is targeting the average consumer not the technologically compentent people that lurk in this form. yes we can all make cheap copies, and some of us can even reproduce the cover and booklet art, but most of the world can't even install a cd drive without a tech "specialist" holding their hand. as for decreasing piracy, my logic stems from this thought: "why should i pay $20 for a movie i already own?"

setarip_old
9th March 2006, 00:23
@Hellworm

Hi!if your are a pirate, you can get everything much cheaper.You don't have to be a "pirate" in order to know how to make inexpensive duplicates of your legally purchased original, commercial DVDs...

Hellworm
9th March 2006, 11:21
The term pirate is ment not for people doing copies, but for those getting movies illegal ( they don't pay for it ) like there are today, and will be there in the proposed system. Why pay anything for the movie ( either media or content ) if you can get it nearly for free.

- For the user this new system would be very nice.
- For the people that do not pay for watching, nothing changes.
- For those selling the content/media it will be worse. they don't get the money multiple times, for selling the same content in higher quality/with new extras ...

deviousterran
12th March 2006, 01:43
the focus of this system was never to reduce piracy, that ust be done in conjuction with the proper authorities. this system would not make it any easier or harder for piracy to occur. the purpose of this system was to decrease the "profits" that the entertainment industry made on selling multiple copies of the same material to one person. i believe that the person should only have to pay for the content once. that is the purpose of this system. piracy ahs always and will always occur under any system, and this system is no different. its simply meant to be fairer to the average consumer. in order to compensate for the decreased losses, however, the entertainment industry could supplement their profits in several ways: selling the extras at a additional cost and seperatly from the main feature, charging slightly (emphasis on the slightly) more per feature, selling statistics to advertising companies gatherd form the suer database(all anonymous info of course). so it wont necessarily mean a decrease in profits, as long as the entertainmet industry has the capability ot adapt.