JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  October 2011

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING October 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: October Theme: Copyright

From:

Rene Beekman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Rene Beekman <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:03:15 +0300

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (100 lines)

Paolo,

A few observations about your comments:

The record labels have not 'discovered' merchandising as a major
source of income __after the start of "internet piracy".
Merchandising, especially when it goes hand in hand with concerts, has
been a bigger source of income than the sales of records even for the
biggest of bands for a very, very long time. The famous example is the
Grateful Dead, who allowed bootlegging of their concerts as a way to
market their music in order to get more public to their concerts and
sell more t-shirts as well as official records. It is worth noting
that they started doing this __after they already had established a
relatively large following.
Also, record companies have not in any way given up on fighting what
they see as "piracy" or "theft". This is not greed, they are simply
hanging on to a business model that once worked but is severely broken
now.

Secondly, about the whole idea of giving things away to drive sales of
what you call derivative products.
While I do agree that this can be a good strategy to drive sales in
certain cases, there are a number of variables in the equation that
are often overlooked or underestimated.
The Freemium model in the software world - you mention Google and
Facebook as examples, although they earn from advertising, not or
hardly from users paying to use their services. This model only works
really well on a massive scale. Generally a very small percentage of
free users become paying users, often just single digits. These few
sales have to support all the costs that need to be made to generate
the free users. This only works if the real costs you incur for the
free users (production + distribution) is relatively negligible (the
mythological near-zero costs of today's online economy) and paying
users can be charged a high-margin fee that is still perceived as
reasonable for the product they receive.

The question is; if 'intellectual products' as you call them are given
away for free, what is it that can be sold at a premium?
The only (limited) succes-stories I've heard is of writers who gave
away older books for free in digital format to generate interest in
new works. This may or may not work for film and video, but would be
hard to implement for most other types of works. Ubu.com distributes
low-quality copies of films that can be rented or bought through
associated institutions.

Here, IMHO, any effectiveness of this strategy is likely to go down as
more institutions start doing the same, thus driving down overall
sales. There's a famous experiment in marketing that involves 2 tables
with jars of jam. On one table, only a few different types of jam are
offered, the other offers a much wider selection. Though the second
table has more people stopping to tast (free users), overal sales are
lower than at the first table.

A few artists, mostly designers, have been able to come up with a new
product that can be sold at a profit, but this is hardly a feasible
strategy for most other artists or even cultural institutions.

As for selling advertising while giving away art or other
'intellectual products'; I'm afraid that model will fall flat on its
face once you approach advertisers. Advertising is by now a low-margin
industry that relies on scale and the ability to reach well-defined,
targeted audiences. The Googles and Facebooks of this world have been
really good at both, but I still have to see the first cultural
institution that knows as much about its audience as systematically as
these companies do.

Despite all that, I do agree that we should investigate alternative
business models and that locking works up in media that artificially
prevent reproduction is not a valid road.
But these business models need to be developed with a full
understanding of the facts.


Rene



> Date:    Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:05:50 +0100
> From:    Paolo Cirio <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: October Theme: Copyright
>
> hi fred,
>
>> about "Paolo's observation below, about digitization being a one new way to increase revenues, when seen with "business eyes." I can tell you that from the perspective of one non-profit organization in the United States"
>
> well, it seems to me that the question is not if the free sharing of cultural products damage not-profit organizations, but the point is actually about funding cultural organizations, public institutions, artists, and so why there aren't even funds for normal public libraries anymore. there are many ways to sustain art and culture and the political and economic climate of today is not really helpful and creative about that.
>
> i think that the free sharing of digital content increases the popularity of intellectual products, and so also the effective derivative revenues. in fact in my email i was speaking about devices, advertising, etc. big money that Google and Facebook know how to make out of free services and content.
>
> another example can be pop music, which is the most pirated ever, but it's still the one that dominates the music business. this because the majors learned about not getting revenues by selling supports of the digital content (cd-rom, mp3, etc) anymore, they shifted in charging more on the derivatives works, like merchandising and live performances, which in fact they recently became very expensive, but at list we don't pay for the supports, and we get used to have the digital files for free, or just through the streaming of Youtube and other online platforms.
> if the majors still aggressively condemn piracy is just for greed, not because they did't manage to move on with other business models that the contemporary technology requires.
>
> so i suppose that there is a shift going on about business models and we are just try to understand them and catch up the right model. i think we shouldn't lock all the digital cultural products in not replicable media, or licensing it with strict policies, that is really a conservative and unworkable way to cope with digital content.
>
> i know that my considerations seem oversimplifications, but i look at the macro systemic schemes, which sometime are forgotten.
>
> all the best,
> paolo.
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager