Happiness for everything at once
At Habré, there are often discussions about money and copywriting, and being an active consumer and a little bit a producer of digital content, I want to share my view on this problem. Pictures to attract attention will not be only the bare text.
“Copyright” causes severe opposition from “users” mainly for two reasons, the restriction on distribution (temporary or geographical) and the “inadequate price”.
Moreover, on the part of the authors, the need to receive remuneration and the choice of a distribution model should not be limited otherwise it undermines the foundations of private property and modern civilization (just like that!)
')
Thus, if the author wants to receive money for his work, then users must pay for it, otherwise it is theft, with no options. But how much and how, this is a topic for discussion.
Often, users agree to pay, but it is either difficult or not at all, because product cannot be bought and used due to restriction. For example, I would love to subscribe to watching new episodes of my favorite TV shows, but they cannot be watched and bought in Russia and the manufacturer does not offer audio track translation, whereas on a well-known tracker, good people just a few days after the original is released, lay out the right option for me . And the case of the legal purchase of a DVD disc in the United States and the impossibility of its reproduction on equipment legally purchased in Russia is beyond the limits of goodness and just very strongly raises a wave of everything that did not have time to leave the rectum.
“Inadequate price,” partly a belief generated by the poor revolutionary consciousness that everything is common and what is not, can be taken and divided. In the conditions of the unbridled onset of digital consumption, the fact of copying without incurring a direct loss to the author only reinforces the correctness of the chosen path. And of course you want to eat a natural product with “professional chow-chow breeders”, and not something that resembles taste. Therefore, we all use Windows, Office, Photoshop and 3D Max, instead of free counterparts from the world of "free" software. It is difficult to force the average person to pay the semi-annual salary out of his wallet for “tsifirki” instead of buying a fur coat for his wife or feeding the child. Where the ratio of software prices to salaries is more benign, then there are no problems with the return of banknotes, and that's a surprise, for money, a person buys the necessary functionality without encroaching on bulky and expensive programs and is quite happy. This can partly explain the success of mobile applications, when for a ridiculous 99 cents, the user gets 15 minutes of happiness.
The situation with media content is more complicated, because if we use the program for $ 100 many times and its value can be somehow justified in our own eyes, then parting from $ 40-60 for a one-time movie viewing when buying a disc, motivation is very difficult, which is often the fault of the filmmakers themselves, 2 / 3 films frank UG. Here, rolling seems to be more appropriate, and its digital version is very user-friendly, but the piece-wise viewing is hard for a work man, accustomed to falling asleep every day with the “pivasik” under another “hollywood masterpiece”. For in a month it pours into a substantial amount, and this is a strangely logical way out is a monthly subscription to services, but the trouble is that such a tariff is not available for Russians, only "white" US residents, again, the insult from such discrimination can be corrected, only pumping out a couple of terabytes of content from the Internet.
Therefore, recognizing the most convenient form of a monthly payment, make it mandatory for every Internet user on the planet, as a contribution to a common, international, media fund. The responsibility for collecting and transferring funds will be assigned to long-suffering telecom operators.
Any author has the right to join the program, without any conditions allowing the free distribution of its content, whether it be software or music, movies, texts, etc.
At the same time, an important condition for his work should be recognized: low transaction costs, more than 90% of the money should be distributed among the authors and the system should take into account the consumed content, “scatter” the payment of each user in proportion to what was consumed, for example, I downloaded 5 movies and 10 serials in a month; payment to share and get exactly the authors of these works. This solves the problem of fair remuneration of exactly successful projects, while novice authors will also get their own piece of cake, and advertising victims will not have time to give a lot of money, because comments in the style of “do not swing this UG”, are already monetized in hard cash. It is also desirable that the content with a high rating had a greater share in the distribution of funds.
If you can finish with movies and music on books, then the authors of the software may well seem to be not enough, then they will need to supplement their incomes by selling versions in the usual way, but bundled with those. support.
Now the most interesting thing is that you need to decide on the price of a ticket “for future free from evil copyists”, i.e. calculate how much each person must pay to the general fund, for free consumption of content on the one hand, and the right to decent pay for their work on the other. To do this, calculate the desired size of this fund.
It is clear that the industry will not agree to reduce its cake, so by Google, you can find a forecast for the growth of the global media industry's turnover to $ 2.2 trillion by 2012. This is not the sour scale of the media market. True, this includes not only software and music films, as well as advertising, profit distributors, TV and so on, but for example, sales of music CDs in the United States, just a little over 2 billion. In the UK for 2012, music, movies and software (on disks and numbers) were bought for $ 6.8 billion, i.e. costs were $ 98 per resident per year. On the other hand, estimates of losses from “piracy” in $ 56 billion sound.
I could not calculate the total size of "our" market cleared of "garbage". But most likely it will be in the range of $ 100-500 billion and divide it into all conscious inhabitants of the “golden billion”, we will get from $ 100 to $ 500 a year or $ 9-42 per month.
As a measure of popularization of the general international fund, the amount of payment can be calculated taking into account the country's GDP, thus, residents of poorer countries will pay in proportion to their income. But now, three hundred rubles a month calculated at the lower boundary, do not seem to me to be a significant burden in exchange for free download and exchange of media content.
I think this would be the ideal system of relations the author - the consumer. I would expand it also on political elections, but Habr is not a place for politics.
Discuss?
“Copyright” causes severe opposition from “users” mainly for two reasons, the restriction on distribution (temporary or geographical) and the “inadequate price”.
Moreover, on the part of the authors, the need to receive remuneration and the choice of a distribution model should not be limited otherwise it undermines the foundations of private property and modern civilization (just like that!)
')
Thus, if the author wants to receive money for his work, then users must pay for it, otherwise it is theft, with no options. But how much and how, this is a topic for discussion.
Often, users agree to pay, but it is either difficult or not at all, because product cannot be bought and used due to restriction. For example, I would love to subscribe to watching new episodes of my favorite TV shows, but they cannot be watched and bought in Russia and the manufacturer does not offer audio track translation, whereas on a well-known tracker, good people just a few days after the original is released, lay out the right option for me . And the case of the legal purchase of a DVD disc in the United States and the impossibility of its reproduction on equipment legally purchased in Russia is beyond the limits of goodness and just very strongly raises a wave of everything that did not have time to leave the rectum.
“Inadequate price,” partly a belief generated by the poor revolutionary consciousness that everything is common and what is not, can be taken and divided. In the conditions of the unbridled onset of digital consumption, the fact of copying without incurring a direct loss to the author only reinforces the correctness of the chosen path. And of course you want to eat a natural product with “professional chow-chow breeders”, and not something that resembles taste. Therefore, we all use Windows, Office, Photoshop and 3D Max, instead of free counterparts from the world of "free" software. It is difficult to force the average person to pay the semi-annual salary out of his wallet for “tsifirki” instead of buying a fur coat for his wife or feeding the child. Where the ratio of software prices to salaries is more benign, then there are no problems with the return of banknotes, and that's a surprise, for money, a person buys the necessary functionality without encroaching on bulky and expensive programs and is quite happy. This can partly explain the success of mobile applications, when for a ridiculous 99 cents, the user gets 15 minutes of happiness.
The situation with media content is more complicated, because if we use the program for $ 100 many times and its value can be somehow justified in our own eyes, then parting from $ 40-60 for a one-time movie viewing when buying a disc, motivation is very difficult, which is often the fault of the filmmakers themselves, 2 / 3 films frank UG. Here, rolling seems to be more appropriate, and its digital version is very user-friendly, but the piece-wise viewing is hard for a work man, accustomed to falling asleep every day with the “pivasik” under another “hollywood masterpiece”. For in a month it pours into a substantial amount, and this is a strangely logical way out is a monthly subscription to services, but the trouble is that such a tariff is not available for Russians, only "white" US residents, again, the insult from such discrimination can be corrected, only pumping out a couple of terabytes of content from the Internet.
Therefore, recognizing the most convenient form of a monthly payment, make it mandatory for every Internet user on the planet, as a contribution to a common, international, media fund. The responsibility for collecting and transferring funds will be assigned to long-suffering telecom operators.
Any author has the right to join the program, without any conditions allowing the free distribution of its content, whether it be software or music, movies, texts, etc.
At the same time, an important condition for his work should be recognized: low transaction costs, more than 90% of the money should be distributed among the authors and the system should take into account the consumed content, “scatter” the payment of each user in proportion to what was consumed, for example, I downloaded 5 movies and 10 serials in a month; payment to share and get exactly the authors of these works. This solves the problem of fair remuneration of exactly successful projects, while novice authors will also get their own piece of cake, and advertising victims will not have time to give a lot of money, because comments in the style of “do not swing this UG”, are already monetized in hard cash. It is also desirable that the content with a high rating had a greater share in the distribution of funds.
If you can finish with movies and music on books, then the authors of the software may well seem to be not enough, then they will need to supplement their incomes by selling versions in the usual way, but bundled with those. support.
Now the most interesting thing is that you need to decide on the price of a ticket “for future free from evil copyists”, i.e. calculate how much each person must pay to the general fund, for free consumption of content on the one hand, and the right to decent pay for their work on the other. To do this, calculate the desired size of this fund.
It is clear that the industry will not agree to reduce its cake, so by Google, you can find a forecast for the growth of the global media industry's turnover to $ 2.2 trillion by 2012. This is not the sour scale of the media market. True, this includes not only software and music films, as well as advertising, profit distributors, TV and so on, but for example, sales of music CDs in the United States, just a little over 2 billion. In the UK for 2012, music, movies and software (on disks and numbers) were bought for $ 6.8 billion, i.e. costs were $ 98 per resident per year. On the other hand, estimates of losses from “piracy” in $ 56 billion sound.
I could not calculate the total size of "our" market cleared of "garbage". But most likely it will be in the range of $ 100-500 billion and divide it into all conscious inhabitants of the “golden billion”, we will get from $ 100 to $ 500 a year or $ 9-42 per month.
As a measure of popularization of the general international fund, the amount of payment can be calculated taking into account the country's GDP, thus, residents of poorer countries will pay in proportion to their income. But now, three hundred rubles a month calculated at the lower boundary, do not seem to me to be a significant burden in exchange for free download and exchange of media content.
I think this would be the ideal system of relations the author - the consumer. I would expand it also on political elections, but Habr is not a place for politics.
Discuss?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/166013/
All Articles