BitTorrent Bundle and Network Marketing

BitTorrent announced a new format of torrent files: Bundle, with a request for action before the jump , it was the appearance of this news that pushed me to write this article, or rather comments to it.

2 comments caught my attention:
')
Qiwichupa , May 7, 2013 at 23: 55 #

What is the point of these paid torrents? From the consumer’s point of view, there’s no point in sitting for paid content, downloaded and left. And why the hell torrent? And in general, it looks as if the copyright holder said: "You guys, then divide our file between you, and we will cut the money from you."

general , May 8, 2013 at 00: 05 #

And what prevents to put on the old lamp classic torrents content thus downloaded, and continue to distribute it in the usual way?

In fact, these two approaches can nullify BitTorrent’s efforts to make peace with the rights holders. In my opinion, the main problem here is in the absence of direct interest of users to remain on hand, or not to distribute the purchased product in any other (pirated) way. Well, if we consider this fact

drakmail , May 8, 2013 at 04:05

When exiting, for example, a new game, when everyone starts to deflate the game itself / updates, official servers often simply lay down. This technology, theoretically, can greatly help in such situations.

then for the dissemination of new technology, user support is simply necessary.

Personally, I am not ready to buy a product, and then donate my resources for its further distribution. A matter of principle. It’s another thing if I could get some kind of bonus or money reward for it. Say, I downloaded with the help of the Bundle game, for which I paid N cu. I would be happy to remain in the distribution, and maybe even would have made some efforts to popularize this game among my friends, if the copyright holder would return me 10-20% of the cost of the game for each copy distributed (ratio> 1). Upon reaching 100% of the price as compensation, there are several scenarios for the development of the relationship between the copyright holder and the user:
• The user ceases to receive remuneration from the distribution of the product, and his further presence in the distribution can only be for altruistic reasons.
• The right holder continues to transfer compensation to the customer’s account, possibly in a smaller amount, but the customer undertakes to spend this money solely on the purchase of other products of the same right holder.
• The user continues to receive rewards for distributing the product, and he can withdraw this reward to his own account and spend at his own discretion.

Naturally, the latter method is more preferable for users, as it allows not only to play the game, watch a movie, listen to music, but also make money on the distribution of the purchased one. This approach is most similar to network marketing, but if everyone benefits from this, is it really bad?