Cheers for that Zing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zing
It only comes as at a cost if you would have bought the product anyway.
|
This is a flawed (yet classic) argument. Aside from the human cost (as referenced above) there is always a cost. In fact this argument, in essence, undermines one of the core principles of the Pirate Party (to destroy the music industry).
The argument is based on the premise that things should be available to share for free - not "are" available for free. In the real world of business and economics businesses do not make things (at a cost to themselves) and then give them away for free for perpetuity. Do the Pirate party, in their advocacy of "free culture" seriously contest that someone should be able to walk into a bar and demand a pint of Guinness for free? Are they suggesting that people should be able to walk into the Louvre and scalp a piece of the Mona Lisa to carry around? Are they suggesting that someone in London should be afforded free flights to Egypt to see and experience the culture of the pyramids? No, of course they don't - because it's a fantastical and unworkable ideal that has been used to popularize, and elect, a political party and move forward a certain individual's right wing agenda. Music, movies, books, software are readily distributable - physical culture isn't and that's where their "stated objective" falls apart.
If pirates (p2p) didn't offer music for free then, by their own logic, the abolition of the record industry would come about at an even quicker rate. If people are genuinely that uninterested / against buying music at a given cost price then why perpetuate this myth by allowing the industry a "piracy" argument? that's right, it's because everybody loves something for "free".
Why not simply call for a boycott on the purchase of recorded music full stop until the industry realize that there has to be a revaluation of the point of sale worth? That would be too simple though, wouldn't it? It would also require people to stand by their supposed "conviction" that music is too dear by abstaining from consumption (free or otherwise). It's a simple premise of supply and demand which the Pirate Party - in their excellence at exploiting same at the expense of others - have chosen to overlook as a viable "consumer" lead revolt.
Look at it this way. Because of losses due to piracy the price of festivals / gigs etc has become inflated to ridiculous levels in an attempt to offset those losses. Who pays these increased prices? That's right "fans". So there's a cost to real music fans as well as to the artists / labels & publishers.
The actions of pirates are what drive the cost of the physical experience up, not down.
Is it just coincidence that the major funder of TPB and the newly elected MEP for the Pirate Party both made very considerable money from patents and copyrights before being shafted in their respected businesses? I don't think so.
By the way "bobbins" - that's my new favourite word, thanks!