Media Offenders
Jan 17th 2008Nik AgarwalBusiness/Finance & My View
It seems that every day, peer to peer (P2P) traffic is on the rise. Almost every media company around the world has categorically illustrated P2P as the bane of the industry. However, very few companies have stepped up and proudly supported P2P technology. The question I pose to most individuals is, “could P2P technology be used for legitimate purposes?” My own answer is yes because P2P allows network traffic to move away from a central server and distributes the traffic over hundreds of network connections. This allows files to be readily available faster while easing network congestion and maybe even reducing costs. However, many companies are threatened by such a model because in its current state, it is actively destroying their commercial enterprise.
I came across an interesting article that looks at the MediaDefender - a company that tries to pro-actively thwart online piracy by flooding numerous sites with fake files - and how it fell from its pedestal through its own faults. MediaDefender and its clients simply fail to understand the basic proclivity of any consumer. This is summarized in thought by one of PirateBay.org’s founder:
consumers don’t care about how Hollywood wants to schedule its releases—movie theaters first, then pay-per-view, and so on. They want the content when and where it’s convenient and comfortable.
I’ve never thought of piracy like that, but I have to admit, he is correct. Consumers want to be able to access content on demand regardless of where and when. For instance, I want to be able to watch the newest movie in the comfort of my own home while the weather outside is freezing cold. Why should I have to drive out to a theatre that has extremely over-priced popcorn and other condiments in frigid weather? What if I could pay the $10 up front and be able to watch that movie in my living room the day it is released?
Piracy is convenient
Everyone can argue that piracy allows anyone to have access to the content for free. And I am not going to dispute that. However, another major benefactor of piracy is simply convenience. It allows me to experience the best without taking away from me too much. It’s far more convenient for me to go ahead and download a song that I heard on the radio rather than wait for it to appear on iTunes. Often, I have noticed that songs I hear on the radio are not always available on iTunes. In addition, “piracy” allows me to fully preview an album before I deem it worthwhile purchasing. The same can go for TV shows. If I want to watch a missed TV show, I can either wait a whole day before Hulu.com or some other site has it available. Or, the smart thing, is to just go on Mininova and download it within several minutes of the program ending on national television.
Companies need to champion convenience
Convenience is what the consumer craves and companies are not willing to provide any convenience. In fact, the only company that is even remotely close to understanding what the consumer wants is Apple. iTunes is a great resource for providing consumers with the content they seek. Moreover, Apple is beginning to tightly integrate several of their products (i.e. AppleTV & iTunes) to make it even easier for consumer to purchase content. If you disagree, just take a look at the onerous methods promoted by Microsoft.
Unfair pricing drives piracy
As a college student, I cannot afford many of the luxuries that try to seduce me. I cannot afford to spend $500 on Adobe software. I cannot afford to spend $300 on Microsoft Office. However, there are times when I absolutely must use certain products in order to successfully complete an assignment or project. The candid part is the fact that thousands of students across the US are in the same boat as me. So what are we to do? Companies would simply say “tough” and I say bullshit to that. I will never accept a company telling me that if I cannot pay an X amount of money I cannot get access to their software to pass a course. And the bottom line is that the damn prices are unfair. Prices should be far more reasonable for consumers in general.
Apple sells Mac OS X Leopard in version for consumers at a price of $129 for a single license or $199 for up to five licenses. Microsoft sells multiple different versions of Windows at different price-points. Windows Vista Ultimate, equivalent to Leopard in many ways, retails for almost $400 for the full version. That is a significant amount of money for any middle-class household. And these companies wonder why people steal. If they had fairer prices, people would actually pay rather than steal. Is that last statement true? Honestly….no
Piracy will never cease
No matter what type of technology is developed or coercive tactics employed by the government and/or companies, piracy will always thrive and lead the way in innovation. As long as their exists a price tag on a product, piracy will exist. The fact that every company needs to accept is that piracy will not go away. You can take steps to reduce its impact but you can never eliminate it. Once companies understand and accept that fact, they can then take the next step and focus on the consumer. Consumers want convenience and they will do whatever they can to ensure maximum convenience. Rather than spending money to eliminate piracy, more companies should invest in strategies that address consumer demands and interests to curtail the effects of piracy. Maybe one day, companies will turn around and listen to their customers. Until then, speak out so others can share your insight. What are your thoughts on piracy and its effects on the industry? What should the companies do? Why is piracy prevailing time after time? These are the questions we all need to be asking and answering.
photo courtesy of rebopper
Unfortunately, I could not get the wireless internet to operate. So I was at a dilemma, either find another laptop or attempt to use 
It is interesting to learn that an individual was able to visit an Apple store daily and write her memoir. I am surprised to learn that the employees at the SoHo Apple Store in New York did not deter her after some time knowing that she was just using their products but was not an actual customer. I have never been to this specific Apple Store, so I cannot comment on how many machines there were, but I would imagine that if a “customer” walked in daily for several months but never bought anything, they would be considered suspicious. Look at it this way, she used a machine that another customer could have looked at, but since she was on the machine, it can be argued that potential sales were lost.
