Re: [SkunkworksAMA] Re: (C) infringement isn't theft, nor are illegally-obtained digital collections

From: <spudugly_at_aol.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:34:55 -0400

 Jim, would you mind if I re-post this to my FA journal?? You've laid it out so well, that I feel like sharing it off-group would be good idea.?
More then likely it won't have any real impact on the issue, but you have a talent for stripping away "bullshit" and I don't think the theft issue can be laid out much better then you've just done.

D.O.P.R


 


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Take a wild, friggin guess <a_change_of_plans_at_yahoo.com>
To: SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:17 pm
Subject: [SkunkworksAMA] Re: (C) infringement isn't theft, nor are illegally-obtained digital collections






















    

            
  My biggest complaint about the "online picture trading" is this: I

have no problem with folks swapping/showing off the artwork I have

scanned in. True, there is often a light watermark on the image

(less intrusive on newer pictures) to let people know where the site

is located. But then, rather than use those, some moron feels

compelled to scan the pictures in at 300 dpi and post the entire

collection (comics included) online in .rar or .zip files (which get

pretty fucking big).



True, some folks would argue "That's not a loss because those

people weren't going to buy them anyway". If that's the case, then

they do not deserve to see them. At least, not in 3500 X 2500 pixel

size. I don't know about how people are being raised these days, but

I was always taught that if you can't afford it, you either save up

for it, or you don't get it. Simple as that. The only freebies that

should be given out in life are the food samples by vendors at the

supermarket.



If I wanted free advertising, that would be better attained by

people passing around the LOWER RESOLUTION WATERMARKED VERSIONS,

which, of course, would list the site address on them. Passing out

hi-rez scans to one's online buddies, sans watermarked address,

doesn't do dick for advertising, yet too many pirates use this sort

of logic these days.



Yes, this sort of behavior does cause a loss in sales. I have

paperwork to back that up. After all, why should someone spend money

to buy prints/folios/comics (which, of course, COST money to

produce), when they could just get them for free? "They weren't

going to buy them anyway"? If that's the case, then why do they ask

for the entire collection, and save all the pictures to their

harddrives? I dunno about you, man, but if I have no intention of

buying something, there's no way I'd download every possible image or

file related to it. Makes no sense.



Yes, it does cost me money to produce these things. Just printing

one Skunkworks folio costs a little over eleven dollars. They

wholesale to Second Ed for $17.50. Not much profit there, is there?

And that's not even taking into account the cost of supplies (pens

are four bucks EACH, pencils are a dollar EACH, and inking pens and

drawing paper are negligible. Care to guess how many colors I go

through in a single picture? Or how long I often spend on one

picture, let alone an entire folio? Yeah, it breaks down to

something like 17 cents per hour as my pay. Not a lot of incentive,

especially when there are so many folks who think it's completely

okay and within their rights to just take what they want without

having to pay for it. Obviously, the concept of capitalism is lost

on these feeble-minded individuals.



So, the best I've been able to do thus far is offer the work on

specialty paper. I don't do digital; I've never been a fan of it,

and don't really intend on using that format in the immediate

future. If people complain because they feel I should "keep up with

the times" and that no one "buys anything on paper these days", so be

it. But that doesn't mean they have the right (as they so often

profess to say they have) to scan and/or download illegally-obtained

copies of my work. They are NOT doing me any favors by doing so.



This is a large part of why there is less work from me these days.

I don't have to contend with piracy in the mainstream genre. People

see a picture they like, they pay for it. I used to make a decent

amount of money in the furry genre before image boards became big,

but with the proliferation of online image theft, it's caused an

immediately noticeable decline in sales. So, do I keep investing

time and money in the genre, hoping I won't get robbed blind, or do I

spend most of my time on mainstream art, where I can generate a good,

solid income free of piracy, and produce furry art as a hobby, as

something I enjoy but only get to do once "work" has been taken care

of?



I find it especially amusing when folks clamor for "moar artz" and

raise hell when I take too long to produce new material, yet they

never have the intention of buying it. They just wait until someone

gets ahold of it and scans it online for all to share. There will

likely be someone who would say I'm complaining about the situation,

and perhaps I am. But if the fandom itself is incapable of taking

responsibility for its actions and shedding the undesireable leeches

from its ranks, then the artists will have to do so. And that

includes things like paysites, pre-orders and copy-proof media.

Folks complain about these things, yet fail to realize they brought

it upon themselves by their actions, or by allowing and encouraging

the illicit actions of others.



And that's my two fucking cents on that.



--JMH





    
  

    
    
    
    




    
    
 
Received on Thu Oct 02 2008 - 18:35:13 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sat Nov 30 2019 - 17:52:30 CST