Quote from: kythri;567703I'm not endorsing or condoning the act, but my belief is that piracy doesn't appreciably impact sales of items.

Ive heard that said, again and again, but typically supported with research that doesn't entirely support the argument (for example, the report that fewer mp3 transactions on torrent sites into France after passing their three strikes law didn't seem to increase sales of music in France).

Many years ago, when internet based software sales were still relatively new, Adobe found through their own research that while the vast majority of the users of Photoshop were using legal copies in Western Europe and North America, however many users of legal copies also used illegal copies of Photoshop plugins (this is not published anywhere - I got this directly from employees at Adobe who conducted this research for the company). At the time, people who were okay with spending $500-$600 for a copy of Photoshop, would pirate a $49 plugin.

You need to be able to decide terms, pricing and availability. Not all IP is the same in that regard.

Quote from: Lynn;567725Thank you for that example, and very interesting indeed!  I seem to recall something about this at the time, though not the specifics. My H. R. Pufnstuf interests had moved on at that point...

However my read of that shows that the court found enough (what would later be labelled) trade dress violations to warrant finding for the plaintiff, and that it was very difficult for the court to separate unprotected ideas from protected expressions.

The notes are very illuminating. I also find paragraph 4 interesting in the disagreement over damages.

I agree that the specific  expressions were very loose, and that the "total concept and feel" and the Unity of Idea and Expression sections show just how complex this specific case was.


Your examples are interesting and thought provoking. I don't believe they completely support the broad generalization of giant robots fighting big green monsters necessarily violating Bandai's copyrights - not without specifics to compare.

I do deal with IP issues with digital goods on an almost daily basis, both on the development side and in dealing with people who rip us off. There are a lot of people who have opinions about IP who have neither experience or any creative properties of their own. If I came off as condescending I apologize - when your creations do get ripped off you feel mightily invested in these kinds of arguments.

Ah, yeah, I can understand that [/defensemechanism]  That case is actually considered to be an addition to the initial definitions laid out in Arnstein v. Porter 154 F.2d 464 (2d Cir. 1946), which was the original decision clearly identifying the access and similarity tests for identifying copyright infringement.  I went with the later case because the subject matter and language were clearer in the scope of a copyrighted idea as opposed to a direct piracy issue (such as the majority of the cases you can find).

Also it was TRANSFORMING jets and giant green humanoids, those two details would probably push it right over the edge, especially if there was some kind of hero-ship to tie it off.  But it was just a broad example, not something I have any kind of 'look what I did here' displays of.  Perhaps FASA's difficulties with unlicensed artwork would be a better example.  They even had to pull out artwork that wasn't directly from the various animes in order to comply with the derivative works issue, despite those having been done (i assume) in house by FASA contracted artists.

Now, I don't know all the specifics of that situation, so if there's a detail I've left out of it that nullifies the example, it's not intentional.

Quote from: Panzerkraken;567735Also it was TRANSFORMING jets and giant green humanoids, those two details would probably push it right over the edge, especially if there was some kind of hero-ship to tie it off.  But it was just a broad example, not something I have any kind of 'look what I did here' displays of.  Perhaps FASA's difficulties with unlicensed artwork would be a better example.  They even had to pull out artwork that wasn't directly from the various animes in order to comply with the derivative works issue, despite those having been done (i assume) in house by FASA contracted artists.

Now, I don't know all the specifics of that situation, so if there's a detail I've left out of it that nullifies the example, it's not intentional.

I must have missed the transforming part, but with enough similarities in expression - its possible. Id worry more about Takara Tomy and Hasbro with anything that transforms from a robot into X. Even if there isn't any litigation, that doesn't stop bully-boy corporate lawyers from trying to intimidate you.

Licensed properties are a minefield of trouble. I license to customers one product that is based on a licensed property from Japan (Megurine Luka), and while the owners are relatively hands off, the terms that accompany its use are much more complicated that original IP that we own.

It doesn't surprise me that FASA had problems with IP. What used to get me was how in supplements for FASA's Star Trek they would have pictures of aliens that were famous people that were "aliened". I recall there being a DeForest Kelley Romulan and a Sean Connery Klingon in different books. Then others which were clearly derived from photos of girlfriends and buddies - there were some not very attractive Orion slave girls among them...

Quote from: Lynn;567734Ive heard that said, again and again, but typically supported with research that doesn't entirely support the argument (for example, the report that fewer mp3 transactions on torrent sites into France after passing their three strikes law didn't seem to increase sales of music in France).

But, if, as I posit, the vast majority of piracy is performed by those who wouldn't have purchased the content if piracy doesn't exist, then that's not a surprising discovery.

Where's my incentive to purchase CDs?  Where's my incentive to subscribe to the PF stuff to get a PDF?  Why don't I just download it for free?

The price for CDs or anything else is what the market will bear, correct?  For many consumers, that price is $0.  Clearly unsustainable, so can be rejected immediately.  However, looking at products like the Humble Bundle, we find that there are a number of consumers that are willing to pay, just not as much as the companies demand.  Usually, a Humble Bundle of three or four games and two charities is somewhere between $10-$15 on average.  iTunes will often have somewhat current albums for less than $10, and older albums for $7 or $8, and of course you can only buy three tracks if that is all you want.

So, consumers think the 'correct' price is closer to $5 for (rather simple) indie computer games*, and less than $10 or so for albums.  In both cases, the cost of the physical media, case and liner notes is less than $.50.  Digital delivery eliminates even this meagre cost, so just about the entire price is profit.  At those price points, I would be willing to bet piracy would be cut at least in half, as people tell their friends to stop being cheap-asses and get their own copy of the game/song because it can literally be had for couch change.


* Some of this downward pressure is undoubtedly from the pricing of smartphone and tablet apps

I still don't think so.

Certainly, there is a subset of piracy that is performed due to disagreement about the cost/worth/value of the prodcut in question.  I just don't believe that it's nearly as big as some want to think.

Even if the cost of a song was a penny, with the cost of the entire album being a dime, I don't think you'd find much of a drop in music piracy.

Conversely, I do think you'll find more sales, but not from former pirates - from folks that weren't pirating and weren't buying.

Quote from: kythri;567786But, if, as I posit, the vast majority of piracy is performed by those who wouldn't have purchased the content if piracy doesn't exist, then that's not a surprising discovery.

Where's my incentive to purchase CDs?  Where's my incentive to subscribe to the PF stuff to get a PDF?  Why don't I just download it for free?

I believe that many of the discussions Ive read about how pirates don't buy, and therefore were never potential customers is an irrelevant red herring, used often as an argument against DRM or legislation like ACTA or SOPA.

A great deal of piracy occurs in industrialized countries with large middle class populations. We all know that piracy is particularly bad in Russia (and other Post Soviet countries), China, Vietnam, and others, and that economic factors can play into that.

But its still the right of the copyright holder to decide how and where to license their product. If I want to compete in the Russian market for product X, then I have to price and adapt accordingly. If I want to maintain a level of exclusivity or scarcity for product X - I should be able to do that (there are certain types of product such as stock photo licensing where that's important).

Quote from: Lynn;567966I believe that many of the discussions Ive read about how pirates don't buy, and therefore were never potential customers is an irrelevant red herring, used often as an argument against DRM or legislation like ACTA or SOPA.

Conversely, I believe that the claims of rampant piracy affecting sales, and the over-inflated claims of lost revenues are false, and red herrings used to justify overly-restrictive/crippling-to-legal-use DRM and draconian legislation like DMCA/ACTA/SOPA/PIPA/etc.

Quote from: Lynn;567966But its still the right of the copyright holder to decide how and where to license their product.

I don't dispute that - as I said, I'm not endorsing/condoning the act.  It is, in most cases, under current law, illegal, and, more ridiculously, now a criminal act instead of a civil issue.

If anything, Eclipse Phase is a perfect example of how a company can openly condone "piracy" by adapting a Creative Commons license, putting it to use for free marketing and a pretty healthy margin. The numbers they've shared with the public are pretty damn good for a first run product.

Quote from: kythri;568039Conversely, I believe that the claims of rampant piracy affecting sales, and the over-inflated claims of lost revenues are false, and red herrings used to justify overly-restrictive/crippling-to-legal-use DRM and draconian legislation like DMCA/ACTA/SOPA/PIPA/etc.

I can't speak to the consumer music or motion picture industries. I believe music and motion picture industries do lose some revenue to piracy because I do know how it works in some other markets.

I have over 20 years of concrete, international management experience in the console game, software and digital media licensing markets. In these markets, piracy has a very direct effect on sales. Its a not so wonderful thing to see what you just finished investing a huge R&D budget on appear on torrent and "download" sites (that generate their revenue through advertising networks) and see your sales drop like a stone shortly thereafter.

Eventually something draconian will pass, because those who supported defeating those bills never come up with a less draconian alternative. Big Music/Entertainment has a deep wallet.

Quote from: StormBringer;567720I guess we might have something of a live case to see how these things work out:
Limbaugh newsletter shamelessly rips-off D&D

Hasbro taking Limbaugh apart, now that would be hilarious.

Quote from: Lynn;568069In these markets, piracy has a very direct effect on sales.

Can you provide documented proof that shows this?  Or is is a correlation/causation bit?

I'm not specifically disputing what you're saying, I'm just challenging whether or not this can actually be proven.

Quote from: Lynn;568069Its a not so wonderful thing to see what you just finished investing a huge R&D budget on appear on torrent and "download" sites (that generate their revenue through advertising networks) and see your sales drop like a stone shortly thereafter.

How do we know sales didn't drop because word got out that the product sucked?

Quote from: Lynn;568069Eventually something draconian will pass, because those who supported defeating those bills never come up with a less draconian alternative. Big Music/Entertainment has a deep wallet.

Oh, to be sure, they do, and I'm sure something far more draconian will pass.  Additionally, I don't truly hold out hope for real copyright reform.

On games: You can't pirate minis (yet). The cards/minis/subscription models are all in some way an "answer" to piracy. I'm hoping for a combination of open rules, a complete box set core with bits and pieces, and subscription-based adventure content as the new standard for mainstream games.

Quote from: beejazz;568164On games: You can't pirate minis (yet).

It is now possible, its just the technology hasn't become widespread.

Give it twenty, maybe thirty years and Bittorrent will have every toy soldier and Lego brick in existence on it.

Quote from: kythri;568145Can you provide documented proof that shows this?  Or is is a correlation/causation bit?

I'm not specifically disputing what you're saying, I'm just challenging whether or not this can actually be proven.

I can't show anything publicly. Sales figures and the like are all confidential data.

Nowadays, with so much out of retail and being sold as a download, its much easier to track. Just as an overview, you can look at the appearance of products on torrent sites, and look at your daily sales reports. Another factor is if you have in-app activations of any kind or apps that "report back" and pass along some sort of unique identifier. There are always hackers who figure out ways to defeat that with a popular application, but it doesn't always happen.

You really don't have any sort of electronic tracking that you can do with content licensing, but you can do your own tracking of sorts, using tools like Google Alerts to figure when and where things are spreading, and also know the habits and whereabouts of your greatest enemies.

The best case is if you are making all or the majority of your sales directly to your customers. I had a content licensing case once where specific products were showing up on warez sites within a relatively short time. Then we analyzed our customer base. The next release, we were able to figure out exactly who was releasing our content to the wild, and dealt with it.

The tricks of tracking are tightly linked to how a company operates internally - its trade secrets. Conceptually I 'get' how movie and music industries work. It is believable they are losing money to piracy. Are they losing as much as they claim? That's hard to say, and they really won't (and its reasonable that they won't) provide information that would truly verify their claims.

You also need to understand product life cycles and how buyers make decisions very well for whatever you are selling, and not mistake the big flappy ear for the entire elephant. What's true for one type of reseller for example isn't necessarily going to hold true for your direct sales - something could get "old" on their shelf, but with direct sales, you can find ways to "freshen" your product.

Quote from: kythri;568145How do we know sales didn't drop because word got out that the product sucked?

If a product sucks...you probably already know it, if you know what you are doing.

Sometimes companies ship sucky products because of bad management decisions, and then someone else gets stuck with making the best of a bad situation. Ive had that. I had a client who had an awesome technology wrapped in an arcane, crappy UI. Basically, it was the underlying technology from the original "Genesis" device of Wrath of Kahn for procedurally based world generation (it came a long way after ST2!). Awesome technology, horrible, horrible UI. I had reviewers apologizing to me!

I've always felt you really need to understand what you are selling (how can you possibly hope to successfully market a product, otherwise?). But a product that may suck for one purpose may actually be a great product for another purpose. Hopefully you can retool your marketing (and your product) before you ship.