Copyright holders vs users: a compromise
I would like to try to formulate how a compromise between owners / producers of entertainment content and consumers could look.
The confrontation between "pirates" and holders of content rights (primarily entertainment) looks like this today.
On the one hand, the owners of rights to content (usually huge corporations), which own the rights to works:
On the other hand, “pirates”, which for financial and / or ideological reasons, using modern technical means, provide the opportunity to find any content in one place (on a single torrent tracker or on a website with online viewing). access to the content is convenient (a couple of clicks), new items appear quickly, the range is the limit (you can find the most incredible things that you have nowhere to buy), as we see the difference not only in payment.
')
Those. I, as a user, would be glad to consume honestly purchased content, but the price should be adequate, and the assortment is full - if you really want to pay, then you don’t have to look for anything else.
From my point of view, there needs to be a compromise solution, which has been talked about a lot lately, but under empty pretexts (if cinema closures took place, it would not be a tragedy at all, since they are not needed, it’s time to go into the past - real estate is liquid, but I do not think that cinemas will die out, as the radio did not disappear after the appearance of television, although their number will obviously decrease, and there is no point in discussing the remaining arguments) The solution should be user-friendly, make piracy useless, and allow copyright holders to earn.
It is clear that there should be no taxes (on the Internet, on discs), this question is clearly outside the tax sphere.
It should be possible, in addition to the contract for connecting to the Internet, to conclude a contract for access to all entertainment content. Monthly fee should be comparable to the cost of the Internet, but rather cable TV (it should be understood that a person even with continuous consumption of content cannot consume it more than 24 hours a day, but in reality is much less), access should be unlimited from all devices of the paid subscriber (it may be necessary to register them in your personal account confirming the SMS code) and his family members, the interface probably should be similar to the Popcorn Time interface - logged in and watch / listen / read what you want.
It may be possible to make two tariffs - cheaper with advertising and more expensive without advertising.
Another variant of the tariff plan - you pay more - new items immediately, less - new items will have to wait
Rightholders should receive a share of the collected money in accordance with the frequency of using their content (to limit markups, you can take into account no more than a certain number of views from one subscriber), should be allocated by a government organization that will support the work of the registry of copyright objects (state torrent tracker) . The distribution should be as transparent as possible, although it still needs to be thought of how to ensure.
Due to the presence of authorization, cunning people who decide to pay one month and try to pump for a year ahead can be monitored, and perhaps reasonable limits on the download speed will not prevent honest users, and such tricks will make senseless, well, the content appears new, it is convenient to have constant access.
The rightholder may not distribute its content through a single register (it may sell itself by any means), but in this case it will be deprived of the right to protection against piracy in the territory of the country. By the way, those who distribute content through a single registry should not be prohibited from other distribution channels - maybe someone does not want to pay a monthly fee, but wants to buy separately. Naturally, such a scheme does not prohibit the creation / distribution of content according to a scheme with voluntary donations; each rightholder is free to choose which scheme to distribute his work.
And only after such a convenient way for the consumer to legally consume entertainment content is created, it is possible to actively deal with pirates, block and punish the pirates themselves, penalize users, but I think with this choice the majority of users would prefer not to violate the law, now almost everything is being violated. usually means that something is wrong with the law.
I’ll clarify that this applies only to end users, and does not apply to those who earn on this content - special agreements with them.
Also, we are talking only about entertainment content - software, scientific or other special information is a separate conversation.
PS perhaps (if there is a lot of feedback) then I transfer this text to my github, so that it is more convenient to work with him collectively, maybe it will turn out the scheme that Mikhalkov was talking about .
The confrontation between "pirates" and holders of content rights (primarily entertainment) looks like this today.
On the one hand, the owners of rights to content (usually huge corporations), which own the rights to works:
- these corporations try to trade information in the same way that they trade in material goods, i.e. sell each copy for such a price, as if it must be released at the factory each time, although at the moment it is possible to sell content without any media, which means that as the sales volume increases, the cost of the copy decreases ie Now the price for the consumer is quite high, you need to pay for a unit of content, which is not very convenient.
- rights owners are very intractable with those who want to trade their content, many fail to agree with everyone (plus if they manage to agree with other restrictions, for example, by country), and the convenience of the consumer requires the ability to get any content from one point.
- The content distribution policy is also not aimed at the convenience of users, the content is released in different countries at different times (not very clear discrimination by country of residence), besides, for example, movies, first of all go out in cinemas, and then on other media, which harms those wants to see a new product at home and is even willing to pay for it
On the other hand, “pirates”, which for financial and / or ideological reasons, using modern technical means, provide the opportunity to find any content in one place (on a single torrent tracker or on a website with online viewing). access to the content is convenient (a couple of clicks), new items appear quickly, the range is the limit (you can find the most incredible things that you have nowhere to buy), as we see the difference not only in payment.
')
Those. I, as a user, would be glad to consume honestly purchased content, but the price should be adequate, and the assortment is full - if you really want to pay, then you don’t have to look for anything else.
From my point of view, there needs to be a compromise solution, which has been talked about a lot lately, but under empty pretexts (if cinema closures took place, it would not be a tragedy at all, since they are not needed, it’s time to go into the past - real estate is liquid, but I do not think that cinemas will die out, as the radio did not disappear after the appearance of television, although their number will obviously decrease, and there is no point in discussing the remaining arguments) The solution should be user-friendly, make piracy useless, and allow copyright holders to earn.
It is clear that there should be no taxes (on the Internet, on discs), this question is clearly outside the tax sphere.
It should be possible, in addition to the contract for connecting to the Internet, to conclude a contract for access to all entertainment content. Monthly fee should be comparable to the cost of the Internet, but rather cable TV (it should be understood that a person even with continuous consumption of content cannot consume it more than 24 hours a day, but in reality is much less), access should be unlimited from all devices of the paid subscriber (it may be necessary to register them in your personal account confirming the SMS code) and his family members, the interface probably should be similar to the Popcorn Time interface - logged in and watch / listen / read what you want.
It may be possible to make two tariffs - cheaper with advertising and more expensive without advertising.
Another variant of the tariff plan - you pay more - new items immediately, less - new items will have to wait
Rightholders should receive a share of the collected money in accordance with the frequency of using their content (to limit markups, you can take into account no more than a certain number of views from one subscriber), should be allocated by a government organization that will support the work of the registry of copyright objects (state torrent tracker) . The distribution should be as transparent as possible, although it still needs to be thought of how to ensure.
Due to the presence of authorization, cunning people who decide to pay one month and try to pump for a year ahead can be monitored, and perhaps reasonable limits on the download speed will not prevent honest users, and such tricks will make senseless, well, the content appears new, it is convenient to have constant access.
The rightholder may not distribute its content through a single register (it may sell itself by any means), but in this case it will be deprived of the right to protection against piracy in the territory of the country. By the way, those who distribute content through a single registry should not be prohibited from other distribution channels - maybe someone does not want to pay a monthly fee, but wants to buy separately. Naturally, such a scheme does not prohibit the creation / distribution of content according to a scheme with voluntary donations; each rightholder is free to choose which scheme to distribute his work.
And only after such a convenient way for the consumer to legally consume entertainment content is created, it is possible to actively deal with pirates, block and punish the pirates themselves, penalize users, but I think with this choice the majority of users would prefer not to violate the law, now almost everything is being violated. usually means that something is wrong with the law.
I’ll clarify that this applies only to end users, and does not apply to those who earn on this content - special agreements with them.
Also, we are talking only about entertainment content - software, scientific or other special information is a separate conversation.
PS perhaps (if there is a lot of feedback) then I transfer this text to my github, so that it is more convenient to work with him collectively, maybe it will turn out the scheme that Mikhalkov was talking about .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/290990/
All Articles