Digital content. What are we paying for? And about the difference between the product and the information about it.
Here, in connection with these discussions, non-vendor providers raised a topic about which I was going to bring order to my head for a long time, namely: in cases when a person produces information mostly and not baking cinnamon buns - what exactly will be a product and what will be related? information advertising, in theory, the nature?
That is, in the case of books on paper, music on vinyl, poster paper on Whatman paper, T-shirts with silk-screen printing, tickets to cinemas, icons on the bag and concerts in clubs, everything is clear - here we have without a doubt a product that even a deaf-blind kinesthetic will notice. But when it comes to mp3 files (it doesn't matter if they are global or local, on the server they are, the hard drive with which a friend went to visit or on the same cdr bought in the store), about books in html or magazines in pdf, o movies that you watch on ipod nano on the subway and many other things that seem to be paid for by the author’s work and work, but it is also copied easier and easier and it’s not quite clear why an intangible copy should be worth the money our opinions are divided.
And I will not say that I am on any particular side: because I myself have paid far from all content consumed, and he himself is initially ready to distribute all his texts, tracks and photos for free (and distribute), but on the other hand, if there is an opportunity I will try not to miss this opportunity to exchange information for money.
')
Now back to the distribution of the product vs. information. I hope everyone agrees that the consumer pays for the product, but when the information becomes not just a bunch of numbers on the disk, but creates reasons for the consumer to give a little something for that very product - then the information can turn into advertising, and so that it reaches the consumer’s eyes or ears already and the producer of this information should be willing to pay? Not to mention a bunch of free or shareware options between these two poles.
And now we get a card from the sleeve, on which is written the “service of providing access to information”. And at the same time statistics on who pays money for the very music in which form. And it turns out that the main buyer of cd will be a girl of 14 years old, who really needs to hold the disc in her hands, and look through the glossy booklet to it. Or maybe buy a poster in the same music store with a photo of your favorite singer and hang it on the wall of the house. A typical buyer of mp3 (or wav) is already a male comrade, from 23 years old and older. Which, in actual fact, it will be easy to find this mp3 in not very good quality and free of charge (and in very good it will also find, except perhaps not so easily most likely) and this comrade pays not so much for “owning the product” but for the opportunity Get this specific information here and now. For the opportunity not to go to the store to dig there in the disks, not to wait half a day while your favorite song will play on the radio to record it for free, not to look for the desired album for half an hour in torrents and then wait a couple of days for its turn to download it.
After all, in order to find out who in his hometown is selling, say, some specific screws, you can go to the library to look through there, which reference book on the subject, completely free. Or you can call a paid referral service, get an answer faster and pay for the cost of the call. Nobody is confused by the services of the same Minsk service 085. Information is free. High-speed access to it is paid. And if I steal a base in which 085 operators look for answers to questions, and begin to perform the same services, but cheaper - then my act will be rather far from morality, and I won’t last long on the market - I need to update the base, yeah .
So the information should be free, yes. For timely access to it makes sense to pay. And if it’s possible to pay not to a pirate in the dark, but somewhere, where even the part of the money reaches the author. Another thing is that the position “I will pay for mp3 only when I am sure that 100% of the money I paid to the author” is also a bit strange, because not only the work of the author should be paid, but also the work of those who provide access to that very information. The author settled in such a way as to receive most of the consumer’s money — honor and praise to him. I created a chain of agents and sellers between myself and consumers - well, we have to pay for the labor of the whole chain. And when the mediators try to sell something completely different from what they have the right to sell, here there is already quite a reason to be dissatisfied and shout “her, the government!”
That is, in the case of books on paper, music on vinyl, poster paper on Whatman paper, T-shirts with silk-screen printing, tickets to cinemas, icons on the bag and concerts in clubs, everything is clear - here we have without a doubt a product that even a deaf-blind kinesthetic will notice. But when it comes to mp3 files (it doesn't matter if they are global or local, on the server they are, the hard drive with which a friend went to visit or on the same cdr bought in the store), about books in html or magazines in pdf, o movies that you watch on ipod nano on the subway and many other things that seem to be paid for by the author’s work and work, but it is also copied easier and easier and it’s not quite clear why an intangible copy should be worth the money our opinions are divided.
And I will not say that I am on any particular side: because I myself have paid far from all content consumed, and he himself is initially ready to distribute all his texts, tracks and photos for free (and distribute), but on the other hand, if there is an opportunity I will try not to miss this opportunity to exchange information for money.
')
Now back to the distribution of the product vs. information. I hope everyone agrees that the consumer pays for the product, but when the information becomes not just a bunch of numbers on the disk, but creates reasons for the consumer to give a little something for that very product - then the information can turn into advertising, and so that it reaches the consumer’s eyes or ears already and the producer of this information should be willing to pay? Not to mention a bunch of free or shareware options between these two poles.
And now we get a card from the sleeve, on which is written the “service of providing access to information”. And at the same time statistics on who pays money for the very music in which form. And it turns out that the main buyer of cd will be a girl of 14 years old, who really needs to hold the disc in her hands, and look through the glossy booklet to it. Or maybe buy a poster in the same music store with a photo of your favorite singer and hang it on the wall of the house. A typical buyer of mp3 (or wav) is already a male comrade, from 23 years old and older. Which, in actual fact, it will be easy to find this mp3 in not very good quality and free of charge (and in very good it will also find, except perhaps not so easily most likely) and this comrade pays not so much for “owning the product” but for the opportunity Get this specific information here and now. For the opportunity not to go to the store to dig there in the disks, not to wait half a day while your favorite song will play on the radio to record it for free, not to look for the desired album for half an hour in torrents and then wait a couple of days for its turn to download it.
After all, in order to find out who in his hometown is selling, say, some specific screws, you can go to the library to look through there, which reference book on the subject, completely free. Or you can call a paid referral service, get an answer faster and pay for the cost of the call. Nobody is confused by the services of the same Minsk service 085. Information is free. High-speed access to it is paid. And if I steal a base in which 085 operators look for answers to questions, and begin to perform the same services, but cheaper - then my act will be rather far from morality, and I won’t last long on the market - I need to update the base, yeah .
So the information should be free, yes. For timely access to it makes sense to pay. And if it’s possible to pay not to a pirate in the dark, but somewhere, where even the part of the money reaches the author. Another thing is that the position “I will pay for mp3 only when I am sure that 100% of the money I paid to the author” is also a bit strange, because not only the work of the author should be paid, but also the work of those who provide access to that very information. The author settled in such a way as to receive most of the consumer’s money — honor and praise to him. I created a chain of agents and sellers between myself and consumers - well, we have to pay for the labor of the whole chain. And when the mediators try to sell something completely different from what they have the right to sell, here there is already quite a reason to be dissatisfied and shout “her, the government!”
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/20549/
All Articles