Kym
05-10-2013, 9:00am
Within the context of the site rules (#17) I like to have a discussion about the impact of © infringement on photography (incorrectly and colloquially referred to as piracy).
Do not discuss how to obtain illegal copies of software or provide links to any illegal download site, or torrent or other such link repository
The subject breaks down to three main areas.
Copying of © images -- i.e. our creative work
Copying of © software products outside of their license
(Note: Gimp is © but the license allows copying)
Copying of © entertainment content (music, video etc.)
We have discussed item 1 in many places on AusPhotography and we won't make that the main discussion point.
Item 2 is the interesting one.
Item 3 is for the purpose of this thread out of scope.
We need to consider that software developers need to make a profit from the activities and
that Microsoft and Adobe (et. al.) have their products are downloaded infringing their ©
Have the software companies lost money on every copy download?
I.e. would an illegal down-loader have purchased a license had they not been able to download.
Probably not, so the losses due to © infringement are grossly overstated.
Have the software companies got the business models correct?
I don't think so, esp. when Apple, Adobe etc. charge .au users double for the same content simple because of geography.
This is where out Govt the ACCC etc. need to take action on our behalf.
We need to lobby on this issue.
What drives © infringement? Can I suggest...
Product pricing, esp. perceived lack of value of software products
Greed/theft (some people will steal anything)
Lack of product support (have you tried getting a problem fixed with a Microsoft product, as opposed to workarounds, reinstalls etc.)
Product upgrade cycles costs (Vista vs Win 7 i.e. Win 7 is really a fix the the junk product called Vista but we get to pay for that fix)
Difficult business models
Geographic pricing disparity
License transfer difficulties
So with the warning above in place what could be done to reduce © infringement, esp. on the part of the product vendors?
Clearly people have major issues with photo editing product vendors as their product pricing and business models seem to be designed to push people to © infringement.
Do not discuss how to obtain illegal copies of software or provide links to any illegal download site, or torrent or other such link repository
The subject breaks down to three main areas.
Copying of © images -- i.e. our creative work
Copying of © software products outside of their license
(Note: Gimp is © but the license allows copying)
Copying of © entertainment content (music, video etc.)
We have discussed item 1 in many places on AusPhotography and we won't make that the main discussion point.
Item 2 is the interesting one.
Item 3 is for the purpose of this thread out of scope.
We need to consider that software developers need to make a profit from the activities and
that Microsoft and Adobe (et. al.) have their products are downloaded infringing their ©
Have the software companies lost money on every copy download?
I.e. would an illegal down-loader have purchased a license had they not been able to download.
Probably not, so the losses due to © infringement are grossly overstated.
Have the software companies got the business models correct?
I don't think so, esp. when Apple, Adobe etc. charge .au users double for the same content simple because of geography.
This is where out Govt the ACCC etc. need to take action on our behalf.
We need to lobby on this issue.
What drives © infringement? Can I suggest...
Product pricing, esp. perceived lack of value of software products
Greed/theft (some people will steal anything)
Lack of product support (have you tried getting a problem fixed with a Microsoft product, as opposed to workarounds, reinstalls etc.)
Product upgrade cycles costs (Vista vs Win 7 i.e. Win 7 is really a fix the the junk product called Vista but we get to pay for that fix)
Difficult business models
Geographic pricing disparity
License transfer difficulties
So with the warning above in place what could be done to reduce © infringement, esp. on the part of the product vendors?
Clearly people have major issues with photo editing product vendors as their product pricing and business models seem to be designed to push people to © infringement.