As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Intellectual property in the awesome future

1235»

Posts

  • ElitistbElitistb Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Elitistb, you don't seem to understand the basic argument. Working on cars isn't a widely appreciated artform in the way music or film is. For someone to create quality music or film on a regular basis, it needs to be their source of income. Otherwise, art will become something that comes into being either eradically or not at all.
    Quality music is easy, and you state it later. Concerts. Payment on performance. Better music gives better performances, more draw. Unless you're saying that local music is always terrible and that you're nothing unless you have a gigantic recording contract.

    Film is the only one that could potentially be hurt, though it more likely would simply evolve to be more interesting, less expensive films.

    You've already disassembled your primary complaints. Congratulations.

    Elitistb on
    steam_sig.png
  • GothicLargoGothicLargo Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    oldsak wrote: »
    edit: but the crux is, if content producers are not able to make money off digital content, then there will be less digital content.

    That's the line the industry feeds congress yes, but congress buys that **** wholesale.

    The market has already spoken. Free or dirt-cheap DRM-less iTunes downloads are about all the market will accept these days in the CONVENIENCE market for information. I'm not saying what's right, I'm just saying what is. It's a pandora's jar situation, the industry cannot close the jar, it's out of their hands whether they like it or not.

    All they can do is adapt or die. Someone will adapt.

    GothicLargo on
    atfc.jpg
  • oldsakoldsak Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Elitistb wrote: »
    Elitistb, you don't seem to understand the basic argument. Working on cars isn't a widely appreciated artform in the way music or film is. For someone to create quality music or film on a regular basis, it needs to be their source of income. Otherwise, art will become something that comes into being either eradically or not at all.
    Quality music is easy, and you state it later. Concerts. Payment on performance. Better music gives better performances, more draw. Unless you're saying that local music is always terrible and that you're nothing unless you have a gigantic recording contract.

    Film is the only one that could potentially be hurt, though it more likely would simply evolve to be more interesting, less expensive films.

    You've already disassembled your primary complaints. Congratulations.

    Actually, music is not that easy. If the concert is the only point at which you're paying an artist, then theoretically those who put on better shows, but not necessarily by making better music, are the ones who will make the most money. All the emphasis moves to the show, whereas creating quality music is tangential. There are a fair number of artists I listen who make quality music for which I have no qualms about paying, but have no desire to see live because they just don't put on that great of a show (and I love going to shows).

    oldsak on
  • ElitistbElitistb Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    oldsak wrote: »
    Elitistb wrote: »
    Elitistb, you don't seem to understand the basic argument. Working on cars isn't a widely appreciated artform in the way music or film is. For someone to create quality music or film on a regular basis, it needs to be their source of income. Otherwise, art will become something that comes into being either eradically or not at all.
    Quality music is easy, and you state it later. Concerts. Payment on performance. Better music gives better performances, more draw. Unless you're saying that local music is always terrible and that you're nothing unless you have a gigantic recording contract.

    Film is the only one that could potentially be hurt, though it more likely would simply evolve to be more interesting, less expensive films.

    You've already disassembled your primary complaints. Congratulations.

    Actually, music is not that easy. If the concert is the only point at which you're paying an artist, then theoretically those who put on better shows, but not necessarily by making better music, are the ones who will make the most money. All the emphasis moves to the show, whereas creating quality music is tangential. There are a fair number of artists I listen who make quality music for which I have no qualms about paying, but have no desire to see live because they just don't put on that great of a show (and I love going to shows).
    If you don't think the music makes the concert, well, I cannot really say anything beyond "I disagree". If I wanted visual spectacle, well, I'd probably go to a movie.

    Elitistb on
    steam_sig.png
  • oldsakoldsak Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    Elitistb wrote: »
    oldsak wrote: »
    Elitistb wrote: »
    Elitistb, you don't seem to understand the basic argument. Working on cars isn't a widely appreciated artform in the way music or film is. For someone to create quality music or film on a regular basis, it needs to be their source of income. Otherwise, art will become something that comes into being either eradically or not at all.
    Quality music is easy, and you state it later. Concerts. Payment on performance. Better music gives better performances, more draw. Unless you're saying that local music is always terrible and that you're nothing unless you have a gigantic recording contract.

    Film is the only one that could potentially be hurt, though it more likely would simply evolve to be more interesting, less expensive films.

    You've already disassembled your primary complaints. Congratulations.

    Actually, music is not that easy. If the concert is the only point at which you're paying an artist, then theoretically those who put on better shows, but not necessarily by making better music, are the ones who will make the most money. All the emphasis moves to the show, whereas creating quality music is tangential. There are a fair number of artists I listen who make quality music for which I have no qualms about paying, but have no desire to see live because they just don't put on that great of a show (and I love going to shows).
    If you don't think the music makes the concert, well, I cannot really say anything beyond "I disagree". If I wanted visual spectacle, well, I'd probably go to a movie.

    I don't necessarily mean a visual spectacle, though that might not necessarily hurt.

    By way of example, I enjoy rock and roll. While good music is an important factor in a live show, the energy of the band on stage can be just as important. Though, I suppose the other elements which are important to a concert and the degree to which they affect the concert depend on the genre of music.

    My point is this: A system which only rewards good performances is more likely to produce great performers, as opposed to great composers.

    oldsak on
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    So, how do computer games fit into this then?

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • GothicLargoGothicLargo Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    So, how do computer games fit into this then?

    They experienced the same thing in the 80's and 90's that movies are experiencing today. Easily duplicated digital data being circulated behind the scenes, bypassing the normal "buy the disc" model.

    We have proprietary consoles which provide the incentive of online play in exchange for adhering to the terms of use, license management and distribution systems like Steam (well, not "like" Steam, but rather, we have Steam), and subscription model MMOs.

    Software piracy forced companies to think out of the box and thus created new options for consumers.

    GothicLargo on
    atfc.jpg
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited February 2010
    So, how do computer games fit into this then?

    They experienced the same thing in the 80's and 90's that movies are experiencing today. Easily duplicated digital data being circulated behind the scenes, bypassing the normal "buy the disc" model

    But movies still have the cinema experience. Music has the concert experience. Games don't have this, a copy of a game is a copy of the game.

    Speaking for myself, I don't want to see a move to either advergames or online only game play.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • GothicLargoGothicLargo Registered User regular
    edited February 2010
    But movies still have the cinema experience. Music has the concert experience. Games don't have this, a copy of a game is a copy of the game.

    Speaking for myself, I don't want to see a move to either advergames or online only game play.

    Uh... you been living in a cave for a decade? The vast, vast, VAST majority of money in the gaming industry is tied up in two principle models:

    1. Subscription online games
    2. Console games

    Most people who break the terms on the console front don't just make copies of games, they also jailbreak their consoles and install linux so they can download game disc images via torrent. This is met with the very real threat of bricking.

    There aren't many truly offline games anymore; even games like Dawn of War II REQUIRE an internet connection so you can connect to a license server (like Steam). The counterbalance to this is that your license key is often now transferable to any computer you happen to be on, you never lose it, and you can download the software again later. So, on paper, the system is a net win for consumers, eliminating many of the legitimate needs for copying.

    The games that haven't moved to this model are the games that don't really have a problem with theft, like Civilization.

    GothicLargo on
    atfc.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.