Publisher Posts Mac Books on The Pirate Bay
Written by Ernesto on March 20, 2008No Starch Press and Wired’s news editor Leander Kahney have released free copies of “The Cult of Mac” and “The Cult of iPod” on the Pirate Bay. Publishing music, movies and books on BitTorrent seems to be becoming a trend, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
The success of the best selling author Paulo Coelho, who posted several of his books on BitTorrent, has inspired the publisher and Leander Kahney -the author of the two books- to do the same.
No Starch Press’ Bill Pollock uploaded the torrent to The Pirate Bay himself, as he writes: “I think that publishers (music and book) are spending too much time circling the wagons and not enough time thinking of ways that they can use technology to advantage.
“Certainly, our move here is a bit unusual, but someone has to take the plunge. May as well be us. After all, we were the first publishers in the United States to come out publicly against the DMCA. Time to put our money where our mouth is, as they say,” Pollock adds.
We applaud this move of course, and hope that many authors and publishers will do similar experiments. When Paulo Coelho, the best-selling author of “The Alchemist” made his Russian translation available, without consent from his publisher, the sales in Russia went from 1,000 books a year, to over 1,000,000. Who doesn’t want that?
Previously: Mininova to Launch BitTorrent Video Streaming
Next: German Court Decision Hands Big Win to File-Sharers
37 Responses
Sweet.
I like what these artists and authors are doing..
Finally, some companies/people are catching on and looking towards the future..
awesome, bold move! I commend you guys!! way to go! congratulations!
sick way to go guys!!!
Certainly the way to go. The best free press an author can get is one where he flies the bird in the face of the DMCA
It sure is a great way to get more publicity. I just hope that now more and more artists/authors/etc are uploading their files they don’t EXPECT to get more sales. Their sales will probably go up if their work is in fact good but not if it’s a pile a shit. I can see artists/authors/etc saying: “damn, i took the effort to upload and share my work with others, yet they still don’t buy it. they just want to pirate after all”. Now then your product sucks, but they probably won’t understand that.
I met Bill at OSCON 06. He was a really cool guy and I thoroughly enjoyed chatting with him. He even gave me “the mug of vi” (a coffee bug with vi commands on it). It’s still my absolute favorite mug.
Way to step up and engage the pirate community! I for one will be purchasing at least one No Starch book because of your actions :)
That’s no apple, that’s Pac-Man. NAMCO to the rescue. Sue Apple to hell and back. kthxbye.
alas! i see the good old fashioned anti-piracy politics of enterteinmnent industries -we all know, grew up whit and got used to-
i see the good old clash
replaced eventually by the indulgent mirage of experiments and new strategies and plans -we know nothing or little or what flatteringly driven to know about- led by insiders with hidden agendas having a long head on marketing quibbles…
theres a problem with this model right now. currently the success of people like these artists, radiohead, and trent reznor are due to the fact that the pirate community is so happy to see free art that they are very generously donating to the artists. Think about it though. When every album every recorded is released free legally, you cant afford to donate money to every single artist in the way that money is being donated to Trent and Radiohead. It just won’t be able to sustain itself. The movement is great, but the results are a bit distorted as an indicator of what is to come.
you know with Comcast’s unwillingness to admit that blocking P2P specifc traffic is just dead wrong, I am wondering what excuses will be mustered when they are blocking the downloads of legitimate files such as this and NINs latest foray.
Disclaimer/reminders:
a. Opaquemurdock is not opposed to file sharing
b. Opaquemurdock is a 100% independent content creator (no record deals please)
c. Opaquemurdock has historically always shared full length high quality content with no DRM
d. Opaquemurdock is not your enemy
Sorry, about the disclaimer. After the harsh reception I got my last visit, I am just trying to cut down on the people assuming I am here to hate on the community. I am just here to discuss, understand the views of others and present concerns I have. Not looking to make war. : )
[quote comment="315270"]It sure is a great way to get more publicity. I just hope that now more and more artists/authors/etc are uploading their files they don’t EXPECT to get more sales. Their sales will probably go up if their work is in fact good but not if it’s a pile a shit. I can see artists/authors/etc saying: “damn, i took the effort to upload and share my work with others, yet they still don’t buy it. they just want to pirate after all”. Now then your product sucks, but they probably won’t understand that.[/quote]
Point taken, but respectfully, I also can see it working in reverse… “Hell no I didn’t buy that crap! Sure I read it. But it was nowhere as good as his last book!”…. “Yeah, I can’t wait for the next one either… maybe it will suck less!” I take it you see the subtle problem with that statement? The person is a fan, but even a minor dissatisfaction becomes an excuse to not contribute. Does that example seem far fetched to anyone? (real question) I really tried to be honest and I think that is well witting our cultures current level of respect for “artists”. We are quick to judge and find fault in even the things that entertain and inform us.
Also,
How would you address artists/authors/etc who are “good” or even “great” but have limited appeal? Being mainstream is only one measure of a works worth, and some would argue it is the least important. What concerns me is that attitudes about what deserves to be supported and what doesn’t will be based on new distorted sense of “worth”.
If the “value” of a self published digitally distributed book is $0-$4.99. And a Significant number of people that enjoyed it… even modestly are willing to pay something in that range, then having 10,000 dedicated fans may still make it worth your while to spend every waking moment writing your next novel, even though most people outside your fanbase would not know what the hell to make of your crazy crap. and in a future like this, everything would be cool and your girlfriend would probably not kick you out.
Thats sounds like a good thing to me. The world needs people outside of the mainstream, thats how new unique stuff that later becomes mainstream is born.
But, If the value of that same self published digitally distributed book is $0-$0.50 and even amongst your 10,000 hardcore dedicated uber fans only a few will donate unless it is friggin PERFECT, then unique content is in dire straights in the future. Maybe those fans read it… maybe they even enjoy it, but since expectations of value are so different in the economy of “free” they don’t feel like they want to donate. Sure its great to have 10,000 fans, but at that scale and percentage of support it means that you will probably need to take an extra shift at the Walmart to catch up on your bills and you may likely never write again… And your girlfriend will kick you out.
Hmmm. I was trying to stay on topic about books, which currently enjoy a bit of a sheltered life in my opinion. People still like to hold books, you hardly ever hear of someone reading an entire book on a laptop… but really in a few years I think the perfect reader will hit and Barnes and Noble will go the way of CD warehouse (to some extent). Some say books will always be with us… I don’t know, we are getting “greener” everyday and people used to feel the same way about vinyl. So music/print I think we are really talking about the same issues, maybe just down the road a bit. So I can’t help but respond to this…
[quote comment="315376"]currently the success of people like these artists, radiohead, and trent reznor are due to the fact that the pirate community is so happy to see free art that they are very generously donating to the artists. Think about it though. When every album every recorded is released free legally, you cant afford to donate money to every single artist in the way that money is being donated to Trent and Radiohead. It just won’t be able to sustain itself. The movement is great, but the results are a bit distorted as an indicator of what is to come.[/quote]
I find myself wondering this as well.
I would add something… in the early days of the (public) interwebs many of us thought the future of music and books would be in micro payments… .10 .15 .25 would buy you a chapter of a book or a song. You know, I would gladly pay .10 for “Kung Fu Fighting” especially if I could be sure a good chunk of that went to the people that wrote and performed the song. And I agree, .99 is too much. Hell, its 10x too much. It was supposed to be millions and millions of people owning every song they had any interest in… affordably. All we needed was smart people to work out the mechanics!
Well, you know the story, nothing happened. I hate greed. Greed and fear together make very little possible.
But its kinda strange the way things turned out. At least for the time being, we instead have the opposite, a few what I can only assume are very rich people who are either amazing fans or possibly dedicated people who understandably want to see a new model work, paying astronomically over the going rate and making the numbers good. It sure doesn’t strike me as the utopia we were shooting for.
We have traded the concept of “huge numbers of artists old and new supported by files so cheap as to be practicly free” for “a hand full of artist supported by wealthy patrons”
So, I have to also predict that dropping large donations and buying expensive exclusive sets will slow down considerably at the very least in the future.
btw, I paid much more for In Rainbows than I needed to, so I count myself as hopeful supporter. I am still trying to figure out if I want the NIN thing and if so, how much of it. My wife got the basic tracks but I am likely to purchase my own. I mention this so you don’t think I am someone wishing for these experiments to fail. Quite the opposite, I want them to succeed, I just don’t see them “trickling down” very far, to borrow a Raganomics term : ) I honestly don’t think they will work as well on a smaller scale. I think the curve will be sharp and harsh and dump a lot of good and worthwhile people on their ass. The business has always been brutal for artist it doesn’t need to be worse.
If I am wrong and talented creative people who work hard are honored and supported in the future by people that freely trade their music/books/films/photography. If people seek out and make a distinction between the genuine independent and the corporate constructed “art” that has treated them like crap for decades…
Nothing would make me happier. I am dying to be wrong.
now i’ll read it.. really.
unless the book is totally crap
true only useless book that make it through internet .
He forgets about merchandice, gigs, tours and sponsership when doing the tours. If an artist gets the fans (which means they’re are good in some way) then they can make the money. Also, you don’t have to donate to every artist you like, just do at least every now and then to something you found nice. I’m pretty sure a lot of people will donate money constantly, but less frequently. Oh, and well done for taking a big leap into the torrent world Leander Kahney.
*quote OpaqueMurdoc* But it was nowhere as good as his last book! */quote*
But basically that’s the same way as it’s working now, at least for me it is. I download everything that i might like, and if I do, i’ll definately buy it! On cd or vinyl, i don’t care.
But i understand your point that most probably lots of people won’t, and just go for it cause its free, and you dont HAVE to pay if you dont want to.
Ah well.. time will tell. :)
Wow, they had proper .nfos and everything. I seem to remember how there used to once be a publisher that was rather clued in to the Intarbutts of olde.
[quote comment="315677"]*quote OpaqueMurdoc* But it was nowhere as good as his last book! */quote*
But basically that’s the same way as it’s working now, at least for me it is. I download everything that i might like, and if I do, i’ll definately buy it! On cd or vinyl, i don’t care.
But i understand your point that most probably lots of people won’t, and just go for it cause its free, and you dont HAVE to pay if you dont want to.
Ah well.. time will tell. :)[/quote]
Kudos to you and many others who support what you enjoy. The world needs more of ya bud!
I see an under-discussed issue here… I think there is a significant body of “middle of the road” works that people still want, but because they don’t see them as “great” they think they are not worthy of support. Art has a range of quality that seems to be getting over looked in these discussions; it simply doesn’t jump from “suck” to “rock”.
It sometimes seems to me like people in these debates want to draw a hard line where everything below is deemed not worthy of survival, even though we all consume and to some degree enjoy all the content throughout the range. I just wonder if this is leading us down a bad path. We LIKE this content… but we just don’t value it enough to cough up a donation… are we really being fair? Or is it the system of value that is out of whack due to years of abuse by publishers record companies, advertisers etc…
Lets hope people don’t get more jaded then they are now and support even fewer content creators.
[quote comment="315629"]He forgets about merchandice, gigs, tours and sponsorship when doing the tours. If an artist gets the fans (which means they’re are good in some way) then they can make the money.[/quote]
Sorry to drift off to the music thing again but I scratch my head every time I see this response. It almost seems like boiler plate copy that was agreed upon and never given a second thought. Is it from a white paper or opinion that someone wrote a while back? Because it sure doesn’t seem to take into account the actual experience of being a touring musician promoting an up and coming music career.
Yes, I can see how this works well for any act of a certain size that has been promoted and sold through the old corrupt system, But I doubt we will see the same result in the coming years. The economy you are describing is the pinnacle result of a successfully promoted career on a reasonably large scale with huge amounts of money involved.
Here it is from my somewhat informed point of view, being as straightforward and honest as I can be.
No one usually sponsors 100% independent or unsigned artist, why would they?
People don’t want to pay for T-shirts for bands that are new to them… it is traditional and expected for you to give them away to promote the band. T-shirts are like promo cash to some extent. People putting on events have to have something to give away, kids in school have to have something to wear, bands need walking billboards.
Tours cost a lot of money… even small scale tours. Based on my personal experience, and the dealings with the incredible regional and national acts that used to play at the small midwest club I used to help run many years back. I can honestly say that its tough to break even on even a small tour. At that club we would get a large range of acts because they all had to drive through our city going coast to coast and might as well play our club and make a few bucks… more importantly we had a shower and would let them sleep on the stage. At that time, the reason you toured was to promote…. uh, waitaminit.
Assuming you are a really great band. (please suspend disbelief, this is rhetorical) Its gonna take several years to reach a tipping point in popularity. Even with really hard work and a lot of luck this is a modest estimate.
If you are giving away T-shirts to promote….
If you are touring at a loss to promote…
and now if you are recording to promote…
Maybe I am further out of touch than I think, but thats why I keep popping up here I guess… to see what the plan is… other than chaos. heh.
And by the way thanks for not rippin me a new one this time around. I do come in peace. heh. I know you have to put up with a lot of people who just want to only see one side. I am not one of those people.
You might say I am looking for your help.
[quote comment="315376"]theres a problem with this model right now. currently the success of people like these artists, radiohead, and trent reznor are due to the fact that the pirate community is so happy to see free art that they are very generously donating to the artists. Think about it though. When every album every recorded is released free legally, you cant afford to donate money to every single artist in the way that money is being donated to Trent and Radiohead. It just won’t be able to sustain itself. The movement is great, but the results are a bit distorted as an indicator of what is to come.[/quote]
I think what you are failing to realise is that the old model involves music consumers giving about 90% of the price of CDs to men in suits rather than the artists. The new model doesn’t require the middle men. If a CD costs £10, only about a pound goes to the artist. Instead of spending £10 on one CD, I could download 4 records, donate £2 to each artist directly (twice what they got with the old system) and still save myself £2.
With this model, the consumer is happy about getting music cheaply, the artist is happy about being recompensed fairly, and the record company execs are out of a job. Sounds good to me!
Obviously, many selfish (or poverty-stricken) downloaders won’t pay anything to the artists, but it strikes me that supply and demand will solve the problem.
E.g. A band puts up an album’s worth of mp3s for free download from its website. Next to this is a DONATE button with wording like “If you liked our songs, please donate as much as you can. We won’t release any further material until X amount of money has been donated”. When the fans can see how much has been donated, they can decide how badly they want to hear the new material and decide how much to contribute. In this way, we will find the true monetary value of music, instead of the ludicrous amounts that currently go to the publishers and marketing wonks. Any bands that can’t raise the money required for recording are clearly not good enough to compete in a crowded marketplace.
It’s always amused me when Big Industry claims to support the “free market”. A true free market is one in which customers are directly linked to the suppliers of goods and services (no middle men) and these goods are sold on the basis of ability to pay.
[quote comment="315903"]
If you are giving away T-shirts to promote….
If you are touring at a loss to promote…
[/quote]
…then you’re clearly not good enough to be paid.
All those bands you had sleeping on the stage and using your shower. Did any of them “make it”? A decent band doesn’t need to give away free t-shirts. Promo freebies are largely pointless costs that record labels waste far too much money on.
In my experience, concert-going fans will BUY T-shirts (and thus provide free advertising) if the band is half-decent. The new model encourages artists to knuckle down and do some proper work. The bands that spend less time drinking the rider and shagging groupies and more time putting on a decent performance
will be rewarded.
While it’s hard for new artists to make money on their first tour, it’s hard for *anyone* to make a decent living on their first job. If a few bands learned to grit their teeth and work, instead of submitting to the charms of drugs, limos and women, the audiences would appreciate the shows more and gladly pay for all the merchandise they can afford.
2 ebooks. Wow. I guess this is that “information exchange” that TPB operators were talking about just a couple of stories ago.
I guess all TPB users will now be rejoicing at this flowering of a new age of information freedom…. once they finish downloading new release movies for free.
[quote comment="315994"]
…then you’re clearly not good enough to be paid.
[/quote]
OK, just a quick comment on the “you’re not good enough to be paid thing”, I think it’s getting over used. I understand what you are saying, but that has yet to be proven. Not to compare, but many blues singers got screwed-over in the American music scene regardless of their talent. Guess they were poor because they all just sucked? Even though they inspired several whole genres of modern music? Nah, the recording industry did not invest in these men due to a perceived lack of marketability, but they gladly stole from them. People don’t tend to seek out the unique or the original it is to easy to have the new thing whispered in your ear. Independents may be great but that won’t matter a bit when you have to compete against the HUGE budgets spent to promote a band that is supposed to look and sound like they are “inde”. I am sorry but by the time yo go to BUY a T-shirt… that battle is over.
I could be wrong though, so 20 years from now when the dust has settled and a legion of talented self published/self promoted artists admit that “yeah, that was a great time for us!” and the ones that fell by the wayside are shown through a “lens of time” to have been all cheese. Then yes, I will congratulate you on your foresight. But for now, it just comes off sounding like a pointlessly aggressive statement. If we (artists) tell you in a calm and cool tone that we have concerns, then why spit this back at us every time?
[quote comment="315994"]
All those bands you had sleeping on the stage and using your shower. Did any of them “make it”? [/quote]
Yes, several bands that played that club for little money or just a chance to get in front of a few more people did in fact go on to have successful careers of varying degrees. But then it was a different time. And thats my very point. I don’t think some of them would have made it now.
[quote comment="315994"]
Promo freebies are largely pointless costs that record labels waste far too much money on.
In my experience, concert-going fans will BUY T-shirts (and thus provide free advertising) if the band is half-decent. [/quote]
I never said anything about record labels, big or small or “concerts” I don’t think you call 200 kids packed into a club a “concert”. Gig or show is a more accepted term here. The touring I am referring to starts in little clubs that are getting harder and harder to find, side stages at outdoor festivals that don’t pay at all. In other words, you are skipping ahead by several years and inserting a “magic happens here cloud” as I see it. I don’t mean to bust your chops but I just am not sure you know how it works. At least in the beginning, and assuming things haven’t changed phenomenally in the few years I haven’t been deeply involved with live performance.
[quote comment="315994"]
The new model encourages artists to knuckle down and do some proper work. The bands that spend less time drinking the rider and shagging groupies and more time putting on a decent performance
will be rewarded.[/quote]
This is so funny to me. Sure, some musicians are drug using jerks… so are some accountants, so are some web programers. We have our fair share of nimrods but I think you are missing something fundamental here. The musicians that selfish, greedy, or don’t have artistic Integrity are chosen to be promoted by the record companies BECAUSE they are easy to manipulate. There are many people who are serious about their craft and often I find them to be the ones not getting the attention because they don’t have those huge budgets behind them, even if they are a really good band while these people you point to get enormous advantage. It is a sick system.
[quote comment="315994"]
While it’s hard for new artists to make money on their first tour, it’s hard for *anyone* to make a decent living on their first job. If a few bands learned to grit their teeth and work, instead of submitting to the charms of drugs, limos and women, the audiences would appreciate the shows more and gladly pay for all the merchandise they can afford.[/quote]
This is very conditional, if you are an independent you could tour for many years and never break the tipping point that would allow you to book larger venues, command larger ticket prices etc… its much like a small business with a great product (100% independent band) vs a fast talking startup with an inferior product and a lot of venture capital (constructed “alt” rock band with a contract).
I don’t claim to know everything about this, mind you. If I was a total insider that would mean I would have crawled into bed with a label long ago, but I saw that I hated the way it worked and I wanted to try to find a way around the corruption and greed. I can’t say I have been 100% successful but I can be proud of the modest success I have had and I didn’t do a single shitty thing to get it.
So, wether you believe that or not… just keep in mind we are not all out here trying to get laid every night and staying high 24/7. Some musicians DO work hard and may actually feel the same way you do about a lot of this stuff.
By the way, in all the time I was involved with that Club, we only saw one outlandish rider (we promptly declined) and only had one band show up so stoned that I was pissed at them… I won’t say the name of the band because they actually went on to be one of the most famous and I don’t want to take away from that… but they arrived late, set up slow, sucked to high heaven, and only played for like 40 minutes. Heh Nowadays they are considered by many to be heroic in stature but I will always remember them as a bunch of asses that cheated honest kids out of a ticket price.
So yeah, we do have a few assholes, but oh my god! The bands I saw that SHOULD have made it! wholly crap. Forget about me and my shitty music… in comparison I am but a worm to some of these guys… and they toured and toured and recorded and gave away T-shirts and sweated and lived in a van I swear to you they did NOT suck! But they are gone. It’s not easy, its never been easy, the new model is not making it any better. And the worst part is, people seem to think we are all liars and scum… Drunkards and greedy bastards… I guess because of how those fakes and suits living off our ideas have ripped you off.
Honestly, I do other stuff now, I could stop making music if I wanted to or just start taking it less seriously… I am not really making these arguments for me. I am making them for future versions of me…
Common, give a little respect to the people busting ass to bring the music.
Oh and books… damn…. I hate helping to derail topics…. sorry. sorry. sorry.
Say Arty, I also just noticed you used the term “shag”, so I have to assume we might a bit of a cultural divide going on here as well. I don’t want to sound like I’m bashing my fellow Americans, but I have gotten the impression over the years that live music from lessor known bands may get better treatment in other places. So much so, that I have even considered looking into relocating overseas for a while. But eventually discounted it as being impractical. heh
thank you.
u rock baby……….thk u soooooooooooooooooooooooo sooooooooooo much for ur support. We love u and No Starch. Keep it up!!!!
check out my blog
http://radonadi.blogspot.com
[quote comment="315510"]Hmmm. I was trying to stay on topic about books, which currently enjoy a bit of a sheltered life in my opinion. People still like to hold books, you hardly ever hear of someone reading an entire book on a laptop… but really in a few years I think the perfect reader will hit and Barnes and Noble will go the way of CD warehouse (to some extent). Some say books will always be with us… I don’t know, we are getting “greener” everyday and people used to feel the same way about vinyl.[/quote]
Are you insinuating vinyl is no longer with us? I hope not, because that would be incorrect, and it’s growth as a fetish-object will only continue to grow right along-side the digital media, because unlike all that it is something “real”, an essence-object, but I digress. We’ll have pure-digital “paper” before the “perfect” book-reader ever comes along. You cannot curl up with a computer, unlike a book. The form is perfect, the problem is our technology simply isn’t there yet, but last article I saw on Wired put it within 10-15 years for digital paper…
The larger issue is still how we will reconcile information’s desire to be free and our want to control and turn profit from it…
[quote comment="316904"
Are you insinuating vinyl is no longer with us? I hope not, because that would be incorrect,[/quote]
You are very correct, that would have been incorrect. So no, I was not suggesting it was no longer with us only that it was with us in a greatly reduced (not necessarily less important) way. Just like I think that books as we know them are destined to change form and largely be less used by most people due to factors of convenience, cost, and ecology. Thats certainly not to say that good old paper books wont ever be printed in the future. I am absolutely sure they will, as a smaller but dedicated number of people will want to collect them or simply prefer the experience of reading a good book in a physical form. That choice will be modified by what you want to display on your shelf as a representation of you. people do it now but I think will become more aware of it and more selective. I bet your Vinyl collection says a lot about you as well. : ) If its a digital file, who cares… As rude and inappropriate as it is, its like that old joke dicks used to tell in high school about fat girls being like mopeds… “yeah, they are fun to ride, but you wouldn’t want to be seen with one.”
I imagime it will go like this…
Moby Dick = 50% hard cover sales, 50% digital download
Stephen Kings “It” = 2% hard cover sales 98% digital download
I like your assertion that we will have “books” based on digital paper. I am aware of this technology and have been keeping an eye on it. When that happens, it will really be the tipping point. I was having a bit of trouble following you but I think I you were maybe saying readers will never have the effect I describe. In other words, there will never be a perfect reader until we have digital paper. If that was indeed your point, I see it, and you may very well be correct. I don’t know though, one device on wich I do work, view video, read books, chat, listen to music, I think we may change our habits and abandon the “perfect form” at least while we are mobile.
So maybe you buy the hard cover of Moby Dick and it comes with the PDF. : )
[quote comment="316904"
The larger issue is still how we will reconcile information's desire to be free and our want to control and turn profit from it...[/quote]
How about we change that last part to “our hope to find a system of fairy compensating artist and content creators for their hard work and ideas that arguably make the world a more interesting place”
Ack, kinda effed that up didn’t I? : P
I hear edit buttons are cool… heh
[quote comment="316904"]The larger issue is still how we will reconcile information’s desire to be free and our want to control and turn profit from it…[/quote]
[quote comment="317064"]How about we change that last part to “our hope to find a system of fairy compensating artist and content creators for their hard work and ideas that arguably make the world a more interesting place”[/quote]
I guess I also should be clear that I know that largely the “want to control and turn profit from” information overshadows anyone out there trying to do it in a more respectful and appreciative way… (I have never sued anyone for example heh) but Its not as black and white as your statement would imply… or as mine either. I work to promote respect for independent artist outside of the old system. I think that respect is an important component of any future that works well.
Chk dis out
http://viewmablogs.blogspot.com/
Yeah, but you must remember that books are a special product in that the digital version is generally inferior to the “old” paperback. Reading a whole book from your laptop screen is not near as pleasant as laying on your sofa with a paper version, and printing a 300-page volume is expensive and results in a messy pile of A4:s. Even if all the books in the world would be available online people would still bay physical books because it is a product that has been perfected in a period of 1000 years or so, so the risk they are taking is actually quite small.
This really is the way to go. I can’t count how many things I’ve bought because I “sampled” them first and decided they were worth the money. Coming after years of disappointment over blowing $50 on a game that I play once, it’s almost mandatory to get a “test-drive” first. If the big corps. started putting out quality merchandice instead of suing customers, they probably wouldn’t be “losing money”.
6 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.