The Fan's failing, is they seem all too eager to go to pirate sites, and
grab commercial material.
I will give you that. It's a double edged sword all around. But I think that
the best weapon against piracy
is to treat your paying customers well, and to try and cultivate additional
paying customers.
Heavy handed copy protection might make cultivating future customers more
difficult.
-Chris
On 5/1/08, Take a wild, friggin guess <a_change_of_plans_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- In SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com <SkunkworksAMA%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Chris Sawyer" <fz1rider_at_...>
> wrote:
> >
> > But what I'm getting at guys, is disabling downloads is hostile to
> the
> > customer.
> >
> > It's like buying a motorcycle, and then the salesman saying "No!
> You can't
> > take it out of the dealership."
> >
> > If an artist wanted to truly protect their art, they would make it
> as easy
> > and friendly to pay for and use as they could. And if you frustrate
> the
> > customer, guess what? You have likely made a pirate out of a former
> > customer.
>
> But therein, I think, lies the problem. If you make something
> easily accessible, there are going to be those who will not hesitate
> to take and/or redistribute the items. If the art is on a paysite,
> someone will join up and snag what they can, let their membership
> expire, and post the site rip wherever they can, either to piss off
> the artist (who they believe should not charge for their work) or to
> get pats on the back from fellow pirates.
>
> The whole mentality of "I don't think it's valuable, so I shouldn't
> have to pay for it" is utter bullshit. There are lots of things in
> this world which I think have no value, but I still believe the
> person producing those items should be reimbursed for their time and
> effort. Opinions mean nothing when it comes to making a purchase,
> aside from whether or not one is going to buy it. If an item is
> marked as costing 20 bucks, but you only think it's worth 5, guess
> what? You don't get the item! Too many folks online seem to think
> their fapping material should be free, frequently updated and
> effortless to obtain. If I treated my mainstream artwork like that,
> I never would have had the money to pay off 100% of my debts or be
> able to buy another motorcycle.
>
> I suppose there really is no way to prevent someone from ripping
> off an artist's work. What's troublesome, though, is that those
> doing the deed see nothing wrong with their behavior. That, I do
> believe, needs some correcting. It's onvious that most of those
> individuals' parents did a poor (or non-existent) job of raising them
> or instilling any values into their offspring. This is especially
> sad because, once these nimrods get out in the real world and try to
> pull that crap, they'll discover it either won't work, or they'll end
> up getting an ass-beating for it. Personally, I'm all for the ass-
> beating (I believe thieves should have hands and/or fingers removed
> after stealing something. This way, the crippled crook will be the
> cause of his own disfigurement, and everyone esle will know that
> person is a thief).
>
> But we're still at square one. The only workable solution that I
> can see at this point, is to continue producing the art on the "copy-
> proof" paper, and/or release a CD of the images at a low resolution,
> unsuitable for printing. Unfortunately, both of these options are
> going to piss folks off.
>
> And again, we're back at square one. What to do, what to do...
>
> --JMH
>
>
>
Received on Fri May 02 2008 - 07:40:52 CDT