Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Think Your App Should Be Free

blog.earbits.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 242 posts

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#121

Post by dextorious »

snippyhollow wrote: post #42
decklin wrote: post #37

I pirated some music today[0]. I went to my usual shops to try to buy it, and for some reason the label had explicitly decided not to offer downloads of any sort. Just vinyl and CD. I wanted it now, and I couldn't really be arsed with those choices, so I stole it. What would an honest Android-app allegory for this be? Perhaps a consumer is faced with these options: 1. An official shop, which accepts money (yay!), giv…

You didn't steal anything (nobody no longer has it because of you), you pirated it.

Really? What a clever and original distinction. It makes all the difference to the guy that wanted people to PAY HIM to use his work, but instead they just use it and don't give him a dime.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#122

Post by dextorious »

sid0 wrote: post #103
earbitscom wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Digital Slavery"? We're talking about owning, or not owning an MP3. Going without it is hardly slavery. It is really very simple. If someone feels the price an artists asks for their songs is too much, or feels that obtaining a copy legally is too much "work", then they don't need to have a copy. They're not entitled to it for any reason whatsoever.

I can't buy most music digitally (except via places like Bandcamp) where I live. I could buy or import CDs, but I don't like waiting and my computer doesn't have an optical drive. Pardon my French, but if you think I shouldn't listen to music at all because of that, you can fuck right off . It's not as if I'm not willing to spend either. I buy plenty of games from Steam and other places. I buy them because they actua…

"I could buy or import CDs, but I don't like waiting"

So, anyone spoiled enough to "not like waiting" can come and steal the fruits of someone else's labour, right?

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#123

Post by toyg »

earbitscom wrote: post #111
toyg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% of musicians make music nobody even heard of . Face it, we're not born with a burning desire to buy Metallica albums. You grow up listening to radio or watching tv, getting exposed to certain types of music (typically between 2 and 6 minutes, most on 4/4, with accompanying lyrics sung by one or two artists) and that's the music you'll end up wanting "that bad" -- pure coincidence? Artists who succeed following tr…

I really don't understand what you're getting at. The argument is essentially that piracy is okay because 90% of artists are never going to earn their living from music. 90% of artists do not create a product that appeals to enough people for them to earn a living selling that product. 10% create something popular enough that they might be able to earn a living at it. How those products came to be popular socially is…

No, what I'm saying is that we're not compensating them for being great musicians, we're compensating their corporate sponsors for being great producers and marketeers.

So I'd rather compensate them for being great t-shirt sellers, it doesn't really make any difference and it will probably guarantee them more cash.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#124

Post by earbitscom »

dools wrote: post #113
earbitscom wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a perfectly fine choice for an artist to make. If they do not want to do that, and instead would like each person who takes a copy of their work to pay for it, is that not also a choice they should have? Your choice as a consumer should then be to either pay that person for a copy, or not take a copy and move on. Nobody is arguing that giving away music isn't a viable model for success - simply that it's not e…

I find that to be sort of like saying I'm a shop owner. My life would be shitloads easier if I didn't have to actually be there, and people could just put the money on the counter and make their own change (like clerks :) You're being an idealist - be more pragmatic and you'll live a life less angry. I may only be speaking for myself here, but I honestly think the law will take a century to catch up here. We're on th…

You're comparing a shop owner who doesn't want to protect their investment because they're lazy to an artist who cannot prevent their product from being taken without being paid for, unless they want to make it unavailable in the format that all of their customers want it in.

It's just sad that asking people to pay for things they take is being an idealist. I'm not angry. I just prefer to speak out against it than act like there's nothing wrong with it.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#125

Post by earbitscom »

buff-a wrote: post #119
davesims wrote: post #59

If musicians had nearly as much stake in their distributed product, from a percent standpoint, as a startup founder has in his/her business, or if the music industry were remotely as equitable, all things considered, as the software industry, then the essay's apparent allegory might ring a little more true to me. But the practical reality is musicians don't have a similar stake, or a similar chance at making a sustai…

And indeed the market has spoken, and most android developers have listened: Apps Should Be Free(mium). That's the difference between startups and Big Music. Startups figure out how to make money out of free apps.

Great idea. Let's start inserting commercials into our songs. Now you're onto something.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#126

Post by gurkendoktor »

dekz wrote: post #46
baddox wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a business/industry perspective (ignoring for now the ethics of piracy or the wisdom of combating it with mass lawsuits), the biggest difference between digital software and digital music is that lots of software providers are still providing value from distribution . Especially with database-driven apps and SaaS products, distribution (hosting) is still most of what you're paying for. If someone leaked the back…

Nine Inch Nails seem to be one of the few bands who are able to look into the future. They offer most(all?) of their music for free to download and make their money touring and selling other merchandise.

I buy lots of electronic music where I would neither bother to see a live show, nor wear their merchandise. What are those bands supposed to do? Be more controversial to make t-shirts attractive? Change their business model by becoming rock bands?

It's like saying that authors can still make money through public readings when pirated ebooks are everywhere, . Or that games can just have unpiratable multiplayer. That's all true, but it kills off whole genres.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#127

Post by jonbro »

earbitscom wrote: post #125
buff-a wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And indeed the market has spoken, and most android developers have listened: Apps Should Be Free(mium). That's the difference between startups and Big Music. Startups figure out how to make money out of free apps.

Great idea. Let's start inserting commercials into our songs. Now you're onto something.

or even better, have some type of in song currency that is used to purchase the new songs, that can be acquired either through sending the old songs to your friends, playing the old songs well, or just outright buying the in game currency.

I think the new bjork album started going in this direction, but could have done it a bit more.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#128

Post by sid0 »

dextorious wrote: post #122
sid0 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't buy most music digitally (except via places like Bandcamp) where I live. I could buy or import CDs, but I don't like waiting and my computer doesn't have an optical drive. Pardon my French, but if you think I shouldn't listen to music at all because of that, you can fuck right off . It's not as if I'm not willing to spend either. I buy plenty of games from Steam and other places. I buy them because they actua…

"I could buy or import CDs, but I don't like waiting" So, anyone spoiled enough to "not like waiting" can come and steal the fruits of someone else's labour, right?

Yep. The cost of waiting (up to a month for imports) and buying an optical drive especially for this is prohibitively high. I will not pay that high a price.

I also take moral issue to calling piracy stealing.

Re: I Think Your App Should Be Free

#130

Post by earbitscom »

lwhi wrote: post #110

The ideas inherent in selling any form of IP are not sustainable. Our economics are traditionally based on finite resources - and economics involving sale of intellectual property allows an infinite number of transactions. In my opinion, we can not expect to make money from the straightforward sale of any form of IP for much longer. New models are being developed and services industries are adapting to offer the valu…

It has nothing to do with not being able to innovate. Coming up with new music that people want is itself innovation, and people should be compensated if you would like them to keep innovating in that way. You can argue otherwise, but all it leads to is people not being able to afford to create those works anymore, or only being able to do them outside of their normal job, and therefore never achieving their full potential, despite creating something that has mass appeal. If you think defending a world where great creative minds are compensated enough to bring more, great art to the masses is increasingly annoying, I suspect you'll get what you deserve in the form of more Rebecca Blacks.
Post reply on HN