Slashdot Mirror
Piracy Is a Market Failure — Not a Legal One
Mr.Fork writes "Michael Geist, Canada's copyright law guru and law prof at the University of Ottawa, posted an interesting observation about the copyright issue of piracy. Canada's International Development Research Centre came to a conclusion that 'piracy is chiefly a product of a market failure, not a legal one' after a multi-year study of six relevant economies. 'Even in those jurisdictions where there are legal distribution channels, pricing renders many products unaffordable for the vast majority of the population. Foreign rights holders are often more concerned with preserving high prices in developed countries, rather than actively trying to engage the local population with reasonably-priced access. These strategies may maximize profits globally, but they also serve to facilitate pirate markets in many developed countries.'"
Are they sure the current strategy actually maximises profit?
The flow my girlfriend went through recently when trying to watch a season of a TV show:
1. Checked to see if it was available digitally on standard channels like Netflix and Hulu (it wasn't).
2. Checked Amazon, where it was available digitally, but only per-episode, at a ridiculous price like $3/ep (making it over $100 for the season, more expensive than on DVD).
3. Downloaded torrent.
She was more than willing to buy it, but it has to be easy and reasonable or "other" methods of distribution win.
That is exactly my case. Let me use ebooks as an example. I always payed for my ebooks. From Amazon, Fictionwise and Ebooks.com. Then, one not-so-beautiful day, "export" restrictions started applying to ebooks. Most publishers would simply not allow those shops to sell me ebooks, because I was on a different country. I even talked to 2 of the authors, and both were aware of this, not happy, and trying to fight these measures, to no avail. As a corroborating note, these specific books were not available in my country, through any channels. Be it physical books, translated or not, or ebooks. Harper Collins is the leader of this "geographic restrictions", as far as I can tell. Well Mr. Publisher, I went out of my way to try getting these books legally. I contacted the shops, contact you and contacted the authors. For reference, everyone but YOU responded. Everyone pointed fingers at you.
Don't bet on it. All the science we have has told us that Cannabis is at least as safe as any drug in our medicine cabinets. Yet we have been fighting a war against it for decades.
You can't use facts to win a debate the government isn't even willing to have.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
*I know there are a lot of people who do not like this term, but I am not currently aware of any other term which brings together all of the various products that can be lumped together under "intellectual property".
That's because they're disparate constructs with completely different purposes that should not be lumped together.
Trademarks exist to protect the public so they know what they're buying.
Copyrights exist to provide incentive for creators to share their works through a guarantee of a monopoly on copies.
Patents exist to convince businesses to share valuable processes from which everyone can benefit.
That's why.