pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: DeviantArt Eyeing Stock  (Read 12329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 15, 2010, 05:36 »
0


« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2010, 05:52 »
0
Some members there are very confused, and some even against the idea of selling images ("I understand why one would want to do this venture, but in doing so it may kill what has kept this so pure. The offering of these works for free to other artists, asking only a link to the finished piece." or "As a COMMUNITY OF ARTISTS, don't you think it's better if we all pool our resources, rather than try to make money out of each other??").

Did you see this link too: http://stockproject.fotolia.com

So in the end their members who want to sell stock will submit to Fotolia?

« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2010, 07:32 »
0
Hm, I understand it the other way around: Fotolia will sell stock images to DeviantArt members. Or not?

« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2010, 07:45 »
0
^ I think the complete plan is both ways. To sell stock images is available now, I guess. The second part is in discussion.

« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2010, 11:24 »
0
I read some of the text on the site and in Fotolia's blog. While I can see why FT might like to sell images to deviantART members, it seems they're heading into a pile of complex issues if they start accepting uploads from the work created using modified stock images. I can't see how you can have clear copyright to sell a derivative work (of an RF licensed stock image) as RF stock. If that's where phase 2 might go, I can see a bunch of gnarly issues with copyright.

And this quote made me laugh "Fotolia, a leading microstock provider worldwide, is the perfect partner for this project as they're a company that is truly committed to using community involvement to change the traditional business of microstock offerings."

FT has an incredibly heavy hand in censoring just about anything even vaguely critical of them in their own forums and is one of the main reasons we have so many anonymous posters here - they have said they won't tolerate criticism of them by contributors even in off site forums. And now they're all about community involvement?

« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2010, 11:50 »
0
What is this all about?

http://stockproject.deviantart.com/


Sounds like they are chumming the waters for new competition for us. Does that mean Fotolia will be filled with Anime and Vampire stuff now?  ;D Or are they just trying to sell images to all the people that like to do photo manipulation?

« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2010, 12:20 »
0
Sounds like they trying to copy Getty/Flickr move.

BTW I read some rumors about AOL with some investment firms taking over Yahoo to sell it into parts. Will Getty buy Flickr?

lisafx

« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2010, 12:58 »
0
I read some of the text on the site and in Fotolia's blog. While I can see why FT might like to sell images to deviantART members, it seems they're heading into a pile of complex issues if they start accepting uploads from the work created using modified stock images. I can't see how you can have clear copyright to sell a derivative work (of an RF licensed stock image) as RF stock. If that's where phase 2 might go, I can see a bunch of gnarly issues with copyright.


Absolutely!  DeviantArt is filled with images created from stock images.  Many times not even licensed stock images. 

It's a smart business move for Fotolia to target DeviantArt artists as a market for purchasing our stock images.  I doubt it will be able to go the other way around, though.  Too many legal issues.

I'm certain that's what ultimately stopped Flikr from turning into a microstock site itself too.  Way too many images hosted there by people who don't own copyright.  In the end it made more sense for Getty to mine the talent there and bring them in to their own collection. 

« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2010, 13:24 »
0
DeviantArt are real jerks too about taking down infringers of copyright. I have been trying to get images pulled from them for over a month. They have no customer service just bots and autorun crap. I guess its time to pull my port from Fotolia.

« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2010, 15:25 »
0
Yes, only a tiny percentage of the stuff you see on 'art' sites is stockworthy in any way. People who make such images and give them away do so for vanity reasons and will have little if any sense of the commeriality of images, or be able to endure rejections of most of they wonderful 'art' by microstock reviewers.
...Does that mean Fotolia will be filled with Anime and Vampire stuff now?...

« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2010, 16:33 »
0
There's a copy of Fotolia's press release on StockPhotoTalk.

At the end is a statement about the second phase which clearly says to me they plan to offer deviantART content as stock:

"The fully integrated product, expected next year, will provide members with seamless on-site access to microstock assets and create a unique deviantART collection from the communitys resources."

I guess when that part is live we'll have to watch very very closely to see that no RF licensed microstock work is included in any derivative deviantART works offered for sale.

Xalanx

« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2010, 16:46 »
0
I guess when that part is live we'll have to watch very very closely to see that no RF licensed microstock work is included in any derivative deviantART works offered for sale.

Indeed that's the main concern. Hands up who's trusting FT to act in our best interest with this !! ... crickets ...

Pixel-Pizzazz

« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2010, 21:27 »
0
Their definition of "What is a royalty free image?"
from this page http://stockproject.deviantart.com/, is ... different.

« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2010, 21:40 »
0
"A royalty free image means that the price of the image is the same no matter how long you use the image for or how many prints you require. Thus, when you buy an image under a royalty free license, you can use this image without a time limit and as many times as you like, provided it is for the same client, campaign or project."

Sigh.

helix7

« Reply #14 on: October 16, 2010, 04:04 »
0
Gotta love the comments on DA about selling stock and agencies requiring Social Security numbers:

"That's ridiculous. Why would they require that? I don't have to report my earnings of selling photos on Fotolia (or prints on dA) if I don't feel like it."

I didn't know that "I don't feel like it," qualifies someone as exempt from paying income taxes.

:)

Carl

  • Carl Stewart, CS Productions
« Reply #15 on: October 16, 2010, 04:45 »
0
Gotta love the comments on DA about selling stock and agencies requiring Social Security numbers:

"That's ridiculous. Why would they require that? I don't have to report my earnings of selling photos on Fotolia (or prints on dA) if I don't feel like it."

I didn't know that "I don't feel like it," qualifies someone as exempt from paying income taxes.

:)

According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

« Reply #16 on: October 16, 2010, 06:09 »
0
According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

Oh, I would love to see where you came up with that one.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #17 on: October 16, 2010, 07:44 »
0
Gotta love the comments on DA about selling stock and agencies requiring Social Security numbers:

"That's ridiculous. Why would they require that? I don't have to report my earnings of selling photos on Fotolia (or prints on dA) if I don't feel like it."

I didn't know that "I don't feel like it," qualifies someone as exempt from paying income taxes.

:)

According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

The IRS must be a regular visitor at your house.

« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2010, 11:50 »
0
According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

The IRS must be a regular visitor at your house.

Maybe he meant, according to his _in-laws_... ?

« Reply #19 on: October 16, 2010, 12:28 »
0
That made me giggle. I think  that the US gov loves to earn money they do need it, to not collect taxes is like mmm hell freezing over, or world peace, unicorns. ::)

lisafx

« Reply #20 on: October 16, 2010, 18:07 »
0
According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

Oh, I would love to see where you came up with that one.

Yeah, seriously!  What "laws" is that according to?  Clearly my accountant is unfamiliar with them... ;)

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #21 on: October 16, 2010, 22:47 »
0
According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

The IRS must be a regular visitor at your house.

Maybe he meant, according to his _in-laws_... ?
Haa, good one!

jbarber873

« Reply #22 on: October 18, 2010, 21:24 »
0
According to the laws, the selling of stock imagery is not a federally taxable activity in the U.S.

Oh, I would love to see where you came up with that one.

Yeah, seriously!  What "laws" is that according to?  Clearly my accountant is unfamiliar with them... ;)

He's probably thinking of sales tax, as there is no sales tax liability if you are selling images online with no physical delivery. But you do have to pay income tax on your earnings, or the man will come and take you away...

lisafx

« Reply #23 on: October 19, 2010, 14:21 »
0


He's probably thinking of sales tax, as there is no sales tax liability if you are selling images online with no physical delivery. But you do have to pay income tax on your earnings, or the man will come and take you away...

Ah, okay.  That makes sense.  However, even though you don't have to pay sales tax, you do have to pay "use tax" on anything you buy to use in your business, at least in Florida.  That includes all those online purchases from out-of-state sites that don't charge sales tax.   I got stuck paying around $1,200 in back use taxes when the state audited me.   

jbarber873

« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2010, 18:23 »
0


He's probably thinking of sales tax, as there is no sales tax liability if you are selling images online with no physical delivery. But you do have to pay income tax on your earnings, or the man will come and take you away...

Ah, okay.  That makes sense.  However, even though you don't have to pay sales tax, you do have to pay "use tax" on anything you buy to use in your business, at least in Florida.  That includes all those online purchases from out-of-state sites that don't charge sales tax.   I got stuck paying around $1,200 in back use taxes when the state audited me.   

In NY, the word is that a sales tax audit will be the worst experience you have ever had. I long ago stopped using my resale certificate to do anything other than collect tax. I pay sales tax on everything, even if it means the state gets 2 taxes on the same item. They like it that way, and it's not my money. I once had an ad agency deduct sales tax from a current invoice for past invoices that they decided they shouldn't have paid sales tax on, and I ended up with maybe 10% of what i was owed. I dropped a dime on them to the state, and they had a huge problem and had to pay the state a lot of back taxes. But guess who didn't get his money back?  :D

Microbius

« Reply #25 on: October 21, 2010, 07:17 »
0
"This doesn't sound so good......
But what exactly is this?? Are you going to start charging people to use stock photos to make their photo manipulations? If so i highly suggest you don't. There are to many of your members who use stock photos but they are unable to afford to pay for them "
lol brilliant!

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2010, 07:53 »
0
"This doesn't sound so good......
But what exactly is this?? Are you going to start charging people to use stock photos to make their photo manipulations? If so i highly suggest you don't. There are to many of your members who use stock photos but they are unable to afford to pay for them "
lol brilliant!

Maybe I should send a notice to Canon and suggest they stop charging for camera equipment because I can afford to pay for it.

« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2010, 08:46 »
0
"This doesn't sound so good......
But what exactly is this?? Are you going to start charging people to use stock photos to make their photo manipulations? If so i highly suggest you don't. There are to many of your members who use stock photos but they are unable to afford to pay for them "
lol brilliant!

On a similar note...
I experienced this whole "gosh, I don't think I should have to pay for it" mentality first hand yesterday...
I've been taking some college courses because I went right from high school into the work world until last year, when I became unemployed. Rather than sitting around turning into a slug, I am taking a Photography I class and one other this semester. A girl in my class just got a new imac and she was telling me all about it. She is in her early 20s. She mentioned she was taking her computer to a friend to have the CS5 software uploaded. Another person from class was there and said "Is it a friend doing it for you because all it takes is feeding DVDs into the drive and following the directions to install." She said yes, it was a friend and he was uploading AND GIVING her all the software, because gosh, there would be no way she could afford the computer AND the software. The other guy (who is also a young person, so not ALL young folks have that mentality) and I looked at each other and said at once, that's called pirating and it's illegal. She shrugged and said oh well, it's too expensive for both things.

In fact, I totally agree with her that the Adobe software is way too expensive, but that's not the point. Stealing is stealing whether it's $1.00 or $1000.00.

« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2010, 09:11 »
0
On a similar note...
I experienced this whole "gosh, I don't think I should have to pay for it" mentality first hand yesterday...
I've been taking some college courses because I went right from high school into the work world until last year, when I became unemployed. Rather than sitting around turning into a slug, I am taking a Photography I class and one other this semester. A girl in my class just got a new imac and she was telling me all about it. She is in her early 20s. She mentioned she was taking her computer to a friend to have the CS5 software uploaded. Another person from class was there and said "Is it a friend doing it for you because all it takes is feeding DVDs into the drive and following the directions to install." She said yes, it was a friend and he was uploading AND GIVING her all the software, because gosh, there would be no way she could afford the computer AND the software. The other guy (who is also a young person, so not ALL young folks have that mentality) and I looked at each other and said at once, that's called pirating and it's illegal. She shrugged and said oh well, it's too expensive for both things.

In fact, I totally agree with her that the Adobe software is way too expensive, but that's not the point. Stealing is stealing whether it's $1.00 or $1000.00.

I don't know. I'm not sure you could learn the suite without stealing it as a student. Not that it is right, but even with the student discount, it is priced out of most students limited budget. It's a shame the prices are so high. I'd probably buy each version if it was cheaper. Now, I just buy every other version.

Microbius

« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2010, 10:27 »
0
I don't know it's pretty much peanuts for the student version. I mean most students are expected to fork out for textbooks and what have you, buying software isn't much more than buying a few books when you have a student discount.
Plus most uni or college computer rooms that teach that kind of thing will have the software installed. If you're learning a vocational or science degree you don't get to take all the lab or engineering equipment home, if can't afford it you use it on campus.
It sucks for all the guys out there that refuse to stoop to thievery, they get out competed by the tea leafs who don't mind taking the software without supporting its development by paying for it.
It's the same in Microstock, if you don't mind stealing you can have all the top end, for example, 3d software, while those of us who don't steal are hamstrung by not having the packages with all the nobs on.

jbarber873

« Reply #30 on: October 22, 2010, 18:50 »
0
"This doesn't sound so good......
But what exactly is this?? Are you going to start charging people to use stock photos to make their photo manipulations? If so i highly suggest you don't. There are to many of your members who use stock photos but they are unable to afford to pay for them "
lol brilliant!

On a similar note...
I experienced this whole "gosh, I don't think I should have to pay for it" mentality first hand yesterday...
I've been taking some college courses because I went right from high school into the work world until last year, when I became unemployed. Rather than sitting around turning into a slug, I am taking a Photography I class and one other this semester. A girl in my class just got a new imac and she was telling me all about it. She is in her early 20s. She mentioned she was taking her computer to a friend to have the CS5 software uploaded. Another person from class was there and said "Is it a friend doing it for you because all it takes is feeding DVDs into the drive and following the directions to install." She said yes, it was a friend and he was uploading AND GIVING her all the software, because gosh, there would be no way she could afford the computer AND the software. The other guy (who is also a young person, so not ALL young folks have that mentality) and I looked at each other and said at once, that's called pirating and it's illegal. She shrugged and said oh well, it's too expensive for both things.

In fact, I totally agree with her that the Adobe software is way too expensive, but that's not the point. Stealing is stealing whether it's $1.00 or $1000.00.

Cathy and Microbius, I totally agree with you. I've had photoshop since it was called "binuscan", and every update costs a fortune. But when I got photoshop for my  daughter through the educational discount, it was pretty cheap. Part of me was thinking- "well they owe me a freebie after all these years", but the other part says- "either you respect intellectual property or you don't". So I paid up. The problem is that there are huge parts of the world, such as china and india, where pirating software is the norm, so we make up the lost sales in higher prices for us. And a lot of kids here have grown up thinking that anything digital should be free.

« Reply #31 on: October 23, 2010, 04:58 »
0
On a similar note...
I experienced this whole "gosh, I don't think I should have to pay for it" mentality first hand yesterday...
I've been taking some college courses because I went right from high school into the work world until last year, when I became unemployed. Rather than sitting around turning into a slug, I am taking a Photography I class and one other this semester. A girl in my class just got a new imac and she was telling me all about it. She is in her early 20s. She mentioned she was taking her computer to a friend to have the CS5 software uploaded. Another person from class was there and said "Is it a friend doing it for you because all it takes is feeding DVDs into the drive and following the directions to install." She said yes, it was a friend and he was uploading AND GIVING her all the software, because gosh, there would be no way she could afford the computer AND the software. The other guy (who is also a young person, so not ALL young folks have that mentality) and I looked at each other and said at once, that's called pirating and it's illegal. She shrugged and said oh well, it's too expensive for both things.

In fact, I totally agree with her that the Adobe software is way too expensive, but that's not the point. Stealing is stealing whether it's $1.00 or $1000.00.

I don't know. I'm not sure you could learn the suite without stealing it as a student. Not that it is right, but even with the student discount, it is priced out of most students limited budget. It's a shame the prices are so high. I'd probably buy each version if it was cheaper. Now, I just buy every other version.

She could buy less stylish laptop (and probably even less powerful one) and the software for almost the same amount of money she had to spend on that Apple thing. So it is definitely not about money. It is about mentality. One feels it is ok to spend X number of dollars on Apple laptop but it is not ok to spend Y on the software. And the feeling is there just because that is how the value is perceived.

« Reply #32 on: October 23, 2010, 07:51 »
0
She could buy less stylish laptop (and probably even less powerful one) and the software for almost the same amount of money she had to spend on that Apple thing. So it is definitely not about money. It is about mentality. One feels it is ok to spend X number of dollars on Apple laptop but it is not ok to spend Y on the software. And the feeling is there just because that is how the value is perceived.

Normally I would agree with you, but in this instance, the school uses all macs (thank goodness) and adobe software, so she is limited if she wants to be on board. And to her credit, she did buy a refurbished apple to save a little money, but you are right. If you're going to spend that money on the mac, wouldn't you automatically factor the software into the budget, too? And I agree with an earlier post...the freakin books you have to buy are outrageous. For my Computer Graphics courses I had to buy 3 classroom in a books and one Leopard manual. If I bought them new, it would have been over $200. I bought them used and spent less for all 4 than one costs, but the point is, everybody knows the game from the start.

I see this whole DeviantArt thing as being a flop...to try to change people at this point in the game is going to be futile. There might be some that accept it, but for the most part, the damage is done. Deviants see nothing wrong with taking other peoples art, deviating it, and letting others download and use it as they see fit.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #33 on: October 23, 2010, 08:02 »
0
I see this whole DeviantArt thing as being a flop...to try to change people at this point in the game is going to be futile. There might be some that accept it, but for the most part, the damage is done. Deviants see nothing wrong with taking other peoples art, deviating it, and letting others download and use it as they see fit.

Awareness is building about photographers/artists registering copyrights for their work. As this becomes more mainstream over the next few years and the average DeviantArt types start getting sued I think this will become less of a problem. But it will always be a problem.

Microbius

« Reply #34 on: October 23, 2010, 16:43 »
0
....it was a friend and he was uploading AND GIVING her all the software, because gosh, there would be no way she could afford the computer AND the software. The other guy (who is also a young person, so not ALL young folks have that mentality) and I looked at each other and said at once, that's called pirating and it's illegal. She shrugged and said oh well, it's too expensive for both things.

I can't afford my house and a Lamborghini, so guess I will have to steal the Lambo  ;D
@ jbarber873 yeah, but the most annoying thing is those Russians/ Eastern Europeans/Chinese etc. that think everything digital is fair game for theft is that many of them come into this industry. They can learn the software for nothing and not have to spend anything to set up in business with the best graphics packages while those of us who do what's right can't afford to get our hands on all that stuff. It makes it very hard for an honest person to earn a living!
 

« Reply #35 on: October 23, 2010, 18:00 »
0
....it was a friend and he was uploading AND GIVING her all the software, because gosh, there would be no way she could afford the computer AND the software. The other guy (who is also a young person, so not ALL young folks have that mentality) and I looked at each other and said at once, that's called pirating and it's illegal. She shrugged and said oh well, it's too expensive for both things.

I can't afford my house and a Lamborghini, so guess I will have to steal the Lambo  ;D
@ jbarber873 yeah, but the most annoying thing is those Russians/ Eastern Europeans/Chinese etc. that think everything digital is fair game for theft is that many of them come into this industry. They can learn the software for nothing and not have to spend anything to set up in business with the best graphics packages while those of us who do what's right can't afford to get our hands on all that stuff. It makes it very hard for an honest person to earn a living!
Instead of "...the most annoying thing is those Russians/ Eastern Europeans/Chinese etc. that think..." it would be much better to say: "...the most annoying thing is those people who think..."   
There are honest and dishonest people everywhere.   :) 

rubyroo

« Reply #36 on: October 23, 2010, 18:02 »
0
Instead of "...the most annoying thing is those Russians/ Eastern Europeans/Chinese etc. that think..." it would be much better to say: "...the most annoying thing is those people who think..."   
There are honest and dishonest people everywhere.   :) 

Well said Digital66.  I couldn't agree more.

« Reply #37 on: October 23, 2010, 18:17 »
0
Are you sure that people from China and Eastern Europe are actually breaking the law by downloading software? They are governed by the laws of their countries, and I believe that copyright laws in some of those countries don't offer the protection that US copyright law does.

jbarber873

« Reply #38 on: October 23, 2010, 19:03 »
0
Are you sure that people from China and Eastern Europe are actually breaking the law by downloading software? They are governed by the laws of their countries, and I believe that copyright laws in some of those countries don't offer the protection that US copyright law does.

 China, as a member of the WTO, has agreed to enforce intellectual property laws, as part of what is know as the Uruguay round of agreements. This has been the law since 1994. Getting into the WTO was sold to us as a way to bring china into conformity with intellectual property laws. All the members of the WTO are required to enforce these laws, but in practice, China only enforces cases brought to them when pressure is applied by the US government. Otherwise, they look the other way. In the US, there are few publicly traded companies that would take the chance on knowingly pirating software, but that is not the case elsewhere. Yes, piracy happens everywhere, and the polite thing is to not single out particular countries, but it is a well documented fact. We should not have to negotiate with China and India over enforcement of basic intellectual property laws, but that has been the case, nonetheless. And that hurts all of us.How would you feel if a company in China were selling your images without giving you any royalty? I'd be willing to bet they already are...
    I don't mean to sound like a ranting nutcase ( although I may be) but digital knowledge, whether it's software, images, music or whatever, is easy to steal and hard to track. I don't begrudge emerging countries the oppourtunity to beat us at our own game, but if they don't want to pay for our intellectual property, then they should create their own, not steal ours. ( there i go again- I better stop now!)

« Reply #39 on: October 23, 2010, 19:33 »
0
There are many flavours of jerk. I don't like the deviantart kind they really get my goat. One by one I delete my work from fotolia. bye bye

« Reply #40 on: October 23, 2010, 19:57 »
0
^^Thanks for that info, good to know what the real score is. I have several Chinese students who tell me that downloading is not illegal there for personal use, but perhaps they have as little understanding of the real state of affairs as most westerners seem to have.

« Reply #41 on: October 23, 2010, 20:46 »
0
Are Pirate Bay, Rapidshare, Megaupload, etc hosted in Russia or China? Were Napster and Kazaa created by Russians or Chinese?

jbarber873

« Reply #42 on: October 23, 2010, 22:28 »
0
Are Pirate Bay, Rapidshare, Megaupload, etc hosted in Russia or China? Were Napster and Kazaa created by Russians or Chinese?

I'm not trying to suggest that there is no piracy in the US. What i am saying is that there is at least a working legal mechanism backed by the government to shut them down. Napster and Kazaa are now only legal downloads, thanks to legal pressure. Piratebay and the others are bittorrent sites, so there is no host. If someone is found with illegal software or music here, it can cost them a ton of money. It should be that way everywhere.

Microbius

« Reply #43 on: October 24, 2010, 03:34 »
0
I remember there was a heated discussion about software piracy on this forum where some Eastern European members were trying very hard to convince me that, yes everyone where they come from thinks it's okay to steal IP.
I was arguing that no, it's not everyone and people in the West do it too, but I have to go with what people from that part of the world have been saying.
Anyone from the Eastern block or China want to chime in and say, nope, software piracy isn't far more prolific and less well policed in these countries?
It seems to be largely a cultural thing, it's not even considered theft over there it seems.

« Reply #44 on: October 24, 2010, 05:25 »
0
I agree with Microbius, and yes, I'm from - more or less - one of those eastern countries. The further east you go in Europe, the higher % of people steal intellectual property. Although the progress in last say 10 years is significant (in the right direction).

Similarly with laws - while they are are approx. the same in most countries, the difference is in their enforcement.

Yes, people may not like to hear it, but it is extremely likely that large % of contributors from these countries use stolen software, especially PS. My guess would be that some legalized their software once they reached certain level and there are few that have it legally from the beginning but the the majority, especially those at lower levels, use stolen software.

That's not a theory. That's the reality of life in these parts of world.

rubyroo

« Reply #45 on: October 24, 2010, 07:24 »
0
Edit:  I shouldn't write with low blood sugar... it never makes sense... let me try that again:

Essentially I think piracy occurs where the disparity between income and software costs is too great.  You find lots of piracy among students and poorer groups in the UK also.  If it's more rife in certain countries, it must surely be because the poverty is greater in those countries.  I believe that most people will pay for a product when it's easily affordable.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2010, 08:35 by rubyroo »

jbarber873

« Reply #46 on: October 24, 2010, 09:14 »
0
Edit:  I shouldn't write with low blood sugar... it never makes sense... let me try that again:

Essentially I think piracy occurs where the disparity between income and software costs is too great.  You find lots of piracy among students and poorer groups in the UK also.  If it's more rife in certain countries, it must surely be because the poverty is greater in those countries.  I believe that most people will pay for a product when it's easily affordable.

   Well I hope that's true. My fear is that the opposite attitude takes over- "why should I pay if my competitors aren't?". There's always a good excuse, and software is pretty expensive here as well, yet I get the same royalty as anyone else in the world when a file sells.

« Reply #47 on: October 24, 2010, 09:17 »
0
Edit:  I shouldn't write with low blood sugar... it never makes sense... let me try that again:

Essentially I think piracy occurs where the disparity between income and software costs is too great.  You find lots of piracy among students and poorer groups in the UK also.  If it's more rife in certain countries, it must surely be because the poverty is greater in those countries.  I believe that most people will pay for a product when it's easily affordable.

   Well I hope that's true. My fear is that the opposite attitude takes over- "why should I pay if my competitors aren't?". There's always a good excuse, and software is pretty expensive here as well, yet I get the same royalty as anyone else in the world when a file sells.

And I am not too sympathetic to most students. Most have a better cell phone than I do, a better car than I do, and drink Starbucks lattes twice a day. I can't afford that. They get the same financial aid for school that I do. And most of them live at home.

Microbius

« Reply #48 on: October 24, 2010, 09:41 »
0
Edit:  I shouldn't write with low blood sugar... it never makes sense... let me try that again:

Essentially I think piracy occurs where the disparity between income and software costs is too great.  You find lots of piracy among students and poorer groups in the UK also.  If it's more rife in certain countries, it must surely be because the poverty is greater in those countries.  I believe that most people will pay for a product when it's easily affordable.
I disagree with this, it's about enforcement and social norms. Our whole market system is based on an antagonistic relationship between buyers and producers.
The buyers (regardless of income level) want to pay as little as possible, producers want to charge as much as possible the market price is set by an interaction between these two forces.
Without enforcement of the law the "little as possible" for buyers is zero. The only things to hold a buyer back from stealing the software are then social norms. If they don't perceive it as theft, then they are going to take it.
I know people in my family living in other parts of the world who have an income very similar to mine, which means in their country they are very well off. They would think it's nuts that I actually pay for software.
Ask Madelaide, she's talked about some of her colleagues and people she knows in Brazil, that are doing fine financially but they don't pay for software because they can get away with it and it isn't frowned upon where they are.

rubyroo

« Reply #49 on: October 24, 2010, 09:47 »
0
Well obviously I could be wrong, and only have my experience to go by (as does anybody) - but my experience has been that most people prefer to legitimise their position as soon as they are able to.  Certainly this is true of everyone I'm still in touch with who was once a fellow student and now earns a decent living.  There are, of course, a body of people who believe in an alternative economy where everything is free, and I come across those from time to time.

Microbius

« Reply #50 on: October 24, 2010, 09:52 »
0
I agree with that, what I am saying is that what is "legitimate" varies from country to country.
What I would consider legitimate use of software (buying it) is seen as insane in some parts of the world.
There first has to be that perception that a legitimate business buys its software. And the way to make that sink in is 1. education and 2. enforcement.
It simply doesn't exist in some countries.

On another note, the alternative economy argument is just nonsense, I haven't heard anyone try to make it that is capable of reason.

« Reply #51 on: October 24, 2010, 14:32 »
0
The prices for Adobe products are crazy. I think they would make a lot more money if it was more affordable, as more "thieves" would purchase it instead of download it.

Microbius

« Reply #52 on: October 25, 2010, 03:45 »
0
1. They are supposed to be pro products. Many of the thieves could do fine with the free/ shareware/ consumer rather than pro products. They steal the best because they can, and would where ever the price point.
2. If you compare the price of Creative Suite to the top end 3D packages out there you would realise that no, it's not that expensive.
3. The cost of these products is one of the only major costs of setting up a studio, and compared to other industries the cost is minimal.
4. The price would be lower if less people were stealing it.
5. You don't like the price don't buy it, don't steal it either because, well it's stealing.
6. I'm sure Adobe will be on the phone to you within the hour asking for more money making tips.

rubyroo

« Reply #53 on: October 25, 2010, 14:28 »
0
I do agree on your perception point, Microbius - and I certainly wish that people of that perception could come to understand the basics i.e. production = remuneration = roof on head/food on table for hard working individuals in the production process, rather than just seeing 'megabucks faceless corporation' at every turn.  I'm sure for some who steal from agencies, they have no idea that there's little old us ploughing away for a crust behind the 'big agency' facade.    I think that's a particular issue for student populations (certainly was when I was a mature student who'd already worked for a living for 12 years, surrounded by 18 year olds of a very different mindset...).  I'll take your word for it on enforcement issues in some countries, as it's not an area with which I'm well acquainted. 

That said - and just to return to my original reason for contributing to this thread, I don't think I'll ever feel comfortable seeing (what I perceive to be) generalisations written about people of any particular nation.  It must surely be the case that no one nation is entirely honest or entirely dishonest.

Microbius

« Reply #54 on: October 26, 2010, 08:41 »
0
Just because something happens everywhere doesn't mean it's equally prevalent everywhere. I totally agree that there are good and bad things about all nations, but that doesn't mean that they are all the same or that discussing the difference should be banned.

That really is... ahem... political correctness gone mad.

Are you suggesting we should all be thinking "you know in Eastern Europe and China a lot more people steal software" and just not saying it? or that we should somehow be kept ignorant of the fact? or convince ourselves that it isn't true (when it clearly is)? I mean I don't really know what you want.
Any serious discussion about software piracy is going to involve finger pointing at those nations where it isn't frowned upon, and why shouldn't it?

Governments in these countries are far more likely to start doing something about the situation if they are called out for it. When it becomes an embarrassment for them that their businesses are considered thieves by the international community they might actually clamp down.

rubyroo

« Reply #55 on: October 26, 2010, 10:03 »
0
All I wanted was to air my view.  I don't want to ban anything, and I think freedom of speech is critical - which also means that anyone should feel free to air an objection or raise a question.  I think your elaboration has been very interesting and informative and thank you for it.  We can all learn something from others, but - speaking for myself - I never learn very much that's of interest unless I try to dig a little deeper than a surface comment, and I feel I've learned more from your elaboration than from your initial words.  Such is the value of dialogue.  

I just don't like generalisations, that's all, and I can't help but react to them (sorry).  It doesn't mean I'm 'PC'.  I've felt the same way since I was a child - long before the term 'PC' was conjured up.  

Forgive me if I sounded as though I was trying to censor discussion in some way - that was not my intention.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2010, 10:06 by rubyroo »

jbarber873

« Reply #56 on: October 27, 2010, 20:12 »
0
Well obviously I could be wrong, and only have my experience to go by (as does anybody) - but my experience has been that most people prefer to legitimise their position as soon as they are able to.  Certainly this is true of everyone I'm still in touch with who was once a fellow student and now earns a decent living.  There are, of course, a body of people who believe in an alternative economy where everything is free, and I come across those from time to time.

Rubyroo-   right after i responded with my rant about people in other countries stealing software, the Wall Street Journal had an article about how software piracy was such a big problem in China the the software companies were trying a new tack- lowering the prices. The article went on to say that the results were encouraging. So, maybe you are right after all.  :)
( now all they need to do is give us the same prices they are charging in china)

rubyroo

« Reply #57 on: October 28, 2010, 02:43 »
0
That is great to hear jbarber, thanks for that information  :)

Yes... price drops here too please... fair's fair  ;)

helix7

« Reply #58 on: October 28, 2010, 08:16 »
0
How did we get to talking about piracy? Funny how these discussions go sometimes. :)

Anyway...

I don't think the Adobe product prices are at all high. From my perspective, for what I get out of using these products, CS is cheap. And really from the perspective of my accountant who sees all types of businesses, large and small, including other solo self-employed folks like myself, being one of the 2 largest expenses I incur annually, from his perspective it's extremely cheap. He actually nags me about my expenses and often tells me that he wishes I could come up with more expenses to write off. The costs of running my business, including equipment and software, is fairly low compared to the costs of running other types of small businesses. I'm not really spending all that much when I buy a CS upgrade. Compare this to say a home repairman. He's got the expenses of a vehicle (typically a van or truck), tools, equipment, supplies, plus I'm sure they need special insurance to be working in people's homes, etc.

I've never bought into the whole idea of Adobe products being too expensive. The student discount is very fair, and beyond that for professionals, this stuff is still cheap as far as professional tools go.

Would lowering the prices cut down on piracy? Maybe. But still not convinced that the prices are so high that the "piracy due to high cost" argument is at all justified anyway.

jbarber873

« Reply #59 on: October 28, 2010, 20:32 »
0
How did we get to talking about piracy? Funny how these discussions go sometimes. :)

Anyway...

I don't think the Adobe product prices are at all high. From my perspective, for what I get out of using these products, CS is cheap. And really from the perspective of my accountant who sees all types of businesses, large and small, including other solo self-employed folks like myself, being one of the 2 largest expenses I incur annually, from his perspective it's extremely cheap. He actually nags me about my expenses and often tells me that he wishes I could come up with more expenses to write off. The costs of running my business, including equipment and software, is fairly low compared to the costs of running other types of small businesses. I'm not really spending all that much when I buy a CS upgrade. Compare this to say a home repairman. He's got the expenses of a vehicle (typically a van or truck), tools, equipment, supplies, plus I'm sure they need special insurance to be working in people's homes, etc.

I've never bought into the whole idea of Adobe products being too expensive. The student discount is very fair, and beyond that for professionals, this stuff is still cheap as far as professional tools go.

Would lowering the prices cut down on piracy? Maybe. But still not convinced that the prices are so high that the "piracy due to high cost" argument is at all justified anyway.

   Gee, my accountant is always amazed at my ability to generate expenses. I could give you a list- and PS would be way down on the list, you're right. I've just gotten to the point after all the upgrades of this software from 2.0 on up that I'm really sick of the upgrade cycle.
    Also, the real answer here is to pay the home repairman more!  :D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
7531 Views
Last post May 16, 2009, 17:14
by Phil
58 Replies
13663 Views
Last post January 26, 2010, 06:41
by Klauts
23 Replies
6358 Views
Last post January 10, 2010, 21:16
by madelaide
9 Replies
3002 Views
Last post July 30, 2012, 12:47
by michaeldb
8 Replies
2598 Views
Last post January 23, 2015, 20:23
by Fuertegfx

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results