Comics Piracy

[kelvingreen]

While much of the existing and aging fanbase is uncomfortable reading off the screen, that's not the case with new readers. For younger audiences, more used to getting everything they want off a close, bright-lit screen, reading comics online is as valid and acceptable an experience as reading them off the page. Plus, the colours are brighter, the lines sharper, there's no dulling brought on by a printing process.

Assuming there isn't a rousing trade in leaked pre-printing copies, surely the scans are of already-printed comics, so the dulling will be in place anyway?

Good piece though, Rich. Nice to see someone approaching the subject from the point of view of "how can the comic industry make use of this technology?" rather than "Eek! Technology! Run away!"

[wishlish]

Most online comics are cleaned up a bit in Photoshop; the guides I've seen on comics scanning give specific instructions on how to make the scans look cleaner and more readable. Quite frankly, most of these guys do a better job of creating archive-quality scans than Marvel and DC do with the older comics; the FF scans I've seen are significantly better than the Marvel Masterworks books I own.

[Michael P]

Did I read that number right? 29 billion Marvel comics scanned?

[Heffaloo]

I'm not a big fan of bittorrent, so I can't speak about that. I have perused what is available on newsgroups. While there are occasional violations, they generally self-police the newsgroups to ensure that nothing is posted that is less than a year old. In fact, many posts are headed with OYATM (One Year Ago This Month). Supposedly this is to cut down on the possible financial impact downloading would have with the publishers. After a year, the only place you would find the titles is in the secondary market.

I own the cd-rom set of the first 500 issues of Amazing Spider-Man from Marvel, and I have to say that the image quality is generally better with the pirated scans.

[The Xenos]

You can find them on Direct Connect servers too.

I know I use DC for manga athat's not out in the states yet. A few are ones that are out here, but I read the scanlations that are ahead. Well, pretty much Berserk and One Piece there, but I'm guying them as they come out too. Oh ewyah, I'm gonna hve to jump ahead on Deathnote too. It's jsut too damn good.

As for comics, I usually only download ones I got for wallpaper and such. I've also downloaded them as I wait to find issues I'm missing.

The only comics I downloaded that I wasn't buying was Identity Crisis. I either downloaded them or read them instores. I wasn't gonna spend money on that upsetting crap. I downloaded them to see if they mad any sense rereading or if what was said online was true.

-Xenos

[solid-one-love]

Todd Allen's book is incomplete and his knowledge of online comics appears to be minimal. I wouldn't consider him an expert.

In any case, he's definitely wrong in saying that we don't know how many people are downloading. We can make a very, very good guess as to how many comics are being downloaded; we know what sites track torrents. These sites indicate how many people are downloading and how many have completed a download. By gathering data over a period of time, we can predict with fair certainty how many additional people have downloaded at least a partial set.

Through BitTorrent alone, more than 20,000 people will download the bulk of any given week's comics within two months of release. More than 4,000 people will download via one site, which will will call "Z". More than 3,000 people will download via another site, which will will call "D". We don't know how many are downloading via DC++ or IRC, but it is less significant.

More people are downloading Aquaman than are buying it.

And it's not illegal to do so in every country.

[comicartfan]

I've also downloaded them as I wait to find issues I'm missing.The only comics I downloaded that I wasn't buying was Identity Crisis. I either downloaded them or read them instores. I wasn't gonna spend money on that upsetting crap. I downloaded them to see if they mad any sense rereading or if what was said online was true.
-Xenos
Does that justify you stealing? When you steal for whatever reason, You are taking away from everyone who had a hand in publishing that book. I heard the movie "elektra" sucked balls, but I won't download it to check for the accuracy of that statement. If you can't afford it , or don't have any intentions of paying for it, then leave it alone. You are a thief, and should be prosecuted as such.

[sixstringguild]

I can't imagine having to read comics through a computer screen of some sort. This makes me feel old because I'm starting to sound like old people I know who marvelled at the use of mp3s...

[markus]

Does that justify you stealing? When you steal for whatever reason, You are taking away from everyone who had a hand in publishing that book. Unfortunately, that second sentence is simply wrong in this particular case. Digital content means you can produce and equivalent copy at essentially zero cost and the original stays with it's owner. Unlike a pack of chewing gum, which only one person can physically have, digital piracy does not take anything physical away from the original owner (hence "piracy" not "theft").
A case might be made that the original owner looses the potential sale of the content, but that again hardly applies if the pirate was not going to buy the thing anyway.
So, sales lost = 0, actual issues (with printing, distribution costs) lost = 0 and hence amount taken away "away from everyone who had a hand in publishing that book" is also zero.
Granted, that doesn't address the moral dimension, and in that respect the above statement may have merit. But as a non-figurative statement of fact, it is simply wrong.
I heard the movie "elektra" sucked balls, but I won't download it to check for the accuracy of that statement. If you can't afford it , or don't have any intentions of paying for it, then leave it alone. You are a thief, and should be prosecuted as such. By that reasoning - and AFAIK even by the law in some places - borrowing the DVD from a friend makes you a thief as well. I don't agree with that.

[comicartfan]

A case might be made that the original owner looses the potential sale of the content, but that again hardly applies if the pirate was not going to buy the thing anyway.

By that reasoning - and AFAIK even by the law in some places - borrowing the DVD from a friend makes you a thief as well. I don't agree with that.
It IS Theft, no matter what way you try to condone it. If I buy a comic or dvd and physically give it to someone, I don't see a problem with that either. But ,If I were to take that same comic, scan it, and make it readily availabale online for someone to download, then I should be held accountable.

[solid-one-love]

It IS Theft, no matter what way you try to condone it.

It is not theft; it is not 'stealing'. It is, at worst, copyright infringement. Two very different things. It is no more 'theft' than it is 'rape' or 'murder'. It's not even illegal everywhere, so it can't even be called infringement everywhere.

Please do not conflate the issue with emotionally-loaded terms; that serves nobody.

It's perfectly legal to download comics (or anything else) without permission of the copyright holder in Sweden. It is perfectly legal to download music without permission of the copyright holder in Canada.

Are these people thieves? No; no theft has occurred. Should they be prosecuted? No, because they have broken no laws.

The laws in your country do not apply everywhere, and the laws regarding theft apply nowhere in cases of copyright infringement.

Me, I'm a believer in "no harm, no foul." Nobody has yet to show any form of harm to any industry due to P2P filesharing. It should not be illegal anywhere to share movies, music, books, comics, whatever.

And even if some evidence is produced to suggest that downloading is harming creators or publishers, we should not enforce laws to protect the buggy-whip manufacturers, so to speak. They need to adapt to the new markets, and not force the markets to adhere to them.

[comicartfan]

[QUOTE=solid-one-love]The laws in your country do not apply everywhere, and the laws regarding theft apply nowhere in cases of copyright infringement.
QUOTE]
Even though it isn't comics related or even related to piracy, just showing that U.S. laws Do apply elsewhere, repeat that statement to Marc Emery of Canada. He was arrested and charged with shipping marijuana seeds to the U.S. He knew he was breaking U.S. law, and that is all that matters. Marvel and D.C. comics are made here in the U.S. So, if you Steal , or break any of our laws ,Then yes you should be held accountable. You are a thief, pure and simple. You are taking away from the folks that make their living from these books.I don't care if you live in a cave in South Africa , you are a THIEF.

[solid-one-love]

Your example is not analogous; the US is alleging that Emery committed crimes in the US while residing in Canada. He would only be subject to extradition and prosecution if it can be shown that the illegal acts he committed were also crimes in Canada. No Canadian citizen would ever be extradited to the US for downloading music, as it is not illegal here, just as no US citizen would ever be extradited to Saudi Arabia for being a non-Muslim (which is a crime there but not in the US).

And, again, it is not theft.

And the idea that the laws of the US -- or any other country -- should apply to people in countries where the act is not illegal is merely ludicrous.

And, again, there is no evidence to support the assertion that anyone who downloads is taking away from the livings of the artists or publishers.

Basically, you're talking out of your ass. You can be safely ignored.

Anyone else care to chime in with some reasoned discussion?

[comicartfan]

Talking out of my ass? O.K., so someone takes money out of your pocket, and since it's not illegal in the 3rd world country where you live, it's ok? You sir are the idiot.

[solid-one-love]

You have, yet again, asserted that it is taking money out of anyone's pocket without any evidence to back it up. There is no evidence to support that assertion. None. Comics piracy is up, but sales are also up. Book authors like Cory Doctorow consistently point to increased sales by giving away their work. And so on.

You, sir, have made baseless allegations and propagated misinformation. You appear to know nothing about the issue in any context -- the legal issues, the economic issues or the moral issues.

Again, you are talking out of your ass and can be safely ignored.

[Charles RB]

It IS Theft, no matter what way you try to condone it. If I buy a comic or dvd and physically give it to someone, I don't see a problem with that either. But ,If I were to take that same comic, scan it, and make it readily availabale online for someone to download, then I should be held accountable.

What's the difference? You're still giving someone free use of something you bought so they don't have to buy it.

[comicartfan]

There is a big difference in giving one of your buddy's the latest issue of X-Men that you bought and scanning said issue for thousands of people to illegally download. Anyway go ahead and download until your hearts are content. If you don't at least see that it's morally wrong, then you have more problems than just stealing comic books.

[spacewang]

And so it begins.....

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=45958

[markus]

I see solid-one-love has spared me the trouble of pointing out further erroneous assumptions. He/she even got the emotionally loaded term part (to which I usually attach an innocent "What about libraries?").
My compliments and thanks.

[Heffaloo]

I'm going to have to agree with Markus, but only because it sounds safer than agreeing with solid-one-love.

[sherlockbones]

i think old issues should be public goods and available to everyone. do you want to pay homers grandgrandchildren for reading the odessy? i think the web is analog to a public libary or museum (only paid for maintaining not profit) were u get cultural knowledge for free.

and it wouldn t affect back market that much or do u think gsuxm is worth less cause there is digital copy?

i d tend to a general agreement concerning currrent issues to give the companys time to adapt to the distribution possibilities. comic book industry has to go with the flow

[dancj]

I think there has been some misinformation on both sides of this argument.

1 - Copyright infringment blatantly isn't theft as nothing has actually been taken. As pointed out earlier, there is potentially loss of sales if someone downloads something they might have bought. There's also potentially a gain in sales if someone downloads a comic, likes it and buys the book.

2 - Just because something isn't illegal in any given country doesn't mean it isn't theft or isn't wrong. Last I knew it was legal in Iraq to kill your wife if she had committed adultery.

Personally I'm a bit on the fence in the whole argument. With music it's very easy to download an album and cover and produce a physical CD almost as goot as the original (or better than the original in the case of copy-protected CDs), but with comics, printing them out is vastly inferior to the original and reading them on the screen is really not as convenient for a lot of peopl so I doubt the pircy is any threat yet. Still within the next 5-10 years, portable displays that you could carry around like a real comic are inevitable, and when that happens....

[stanicus]

i think we can all agree that in some countries, uploading and downloading these scanlations infringes on some form of copyright law. and breaking the law is bad. anyone caught doing it should be willing to accept the consequences.

i personally believe that the majority of people who are downloading would not have bought the hard copy of the comic book anyway. they are just downloading it because it is free. either they cannot afford it or they just do not want to pay for it. they were not real customers to begin with.

if i was one of the comic publishers, i would look at the positive side of it. since they are reading one of your books, your characters are in his or her headspace. maybe somewhere down the road, they will buy a pair of Speedball underwear or buy Cloak and Dagger cereal because of a story they downloaded. it could potential increase the value of a comic property.

i think negative repercussions of scanlations are lessened because of the mercenary aspect of this hobby. what's worth more? a scanlation of NYX #3 or a physical copy of NYX #3 that is CGC 9.8? as great as having 500 issues of ASM on CD, i find greater pleasure in browsing through my collection and finding that an issue of uncanny x-men is worth something. back then, i just bought it to read.

s

[The Xenos]

Does that justify you stealing? When you steal for whatever reason, You are taking away from everyone who had a hand in publishing that book. I heard the movie "elektra" sucked balls, but I won't download it to check for the accuracy of that statement. If you can't afford it , or don't have any intentions of paying for it, then leave it alone. You are a thief, and should be prosecuted as such.

One crappy mini series! I could ahve gone out and walked a few blocks to the nearby store and read the issues and reprints there, but I'm lazy or they weren't open when I wanted to check a certain detail. Yeah, technically it's illlegal, but this was a minor offence. I still buy loads of weekly comics.

Belive me though, I agree that people who do this on a reglar basis and don't buy comics are such thieves tkaing money form epople who worked on these books.

Oh and yes, the Elektra movie did suck beyond belief. Damn my friends for talking me to going to see it with them. Elektra must be rolling over in her grave, unless they dug her up again.

By that reasoning - and AFAIK even by the law in some places - borrowing the DVD from a friend makes you a thief as well. I don't agree with that.

Yeah, hee is the gray area. Some people view online sharing as the same as this. I know it's not, but in some ways, at least upon the first copy it is. I've copies friends CDs to check out myself. I've also given copies of CDs to friends to check out. You hope these people like it and when they can they will buy it.

Then again my friend who permenantly borrowed my copy of the Daredevil soundtrack never gave it back and he's such a lazy ass I know he's never gonna buy it. Hell, pretty much his entire entertainment was borrowed or copied from friends. Movies, videogames. SOB even copied one of my PS2 games without even asking me. Thankfully I got all my orginals back from him, but it just goes to show there are leeches out there who will mooch off this idea and not lift a finger to buy anything themselves.


It's perfectly legal to download comics (or anything else) without permission of the copyright holder in Sweden. It is perfectly legal to download music without permission of the copyright holder in Canada.

Are these people thieves? No; no theft has occurred. Should they be prosecuted? No, because they have broken no laws.

The laws in your country do not apply everywhere, and the laws regarding theft apply nowhere in cases of copyright infringement.

No wonder I see so many Sweedish DC hubs. Anyway, this goes to show that this isn't just a local US legal issue or even just a legal one. It's an issue of global politics and economics between countries as well. Yeah, it isn't theft, but it might be something worse. It opens up a pandora's box of crazy international issues.

-Xenos

[dancj]

i think we can all agree that...[snip]...and breaking the law is bad. anyone caught doing it should be willing to accept the consequences.

I don't. Some laws are wrong and I see nothing wrong with breaking those laws

[solid-one-love]

I don't. Some laws are wrong and I see nothing wrong with breaking those laws

Even if a law is bad, one should be willing to accept the consequences of breaking it.

[moebius]

The industry needs to get on the ball and set up an ITunes system, where they sell each comic for $1, then periodically release CDs in a "trade" format or a printed TPB.

Why aren't people buying comic books today? It sure isn't the piracy, since the market collapsed in the 90s. If anything, the music industry taught us that MP3 piracy increased revenue, by becoming a risk-free way for listeners to try out bands. I know I can trace most every band I follow today to 1) friend recommendations (the Strokes, Franz Ferdinand) or 2) MP3s in college (Radiohead, the White Stripes). Either way, I buy the CDs from the good bands, because lugging a laptop around just for Winamp is cumbersome.

What the music industry is really afraid of is that bad bands will see sales drop. Since 90% of all art is crap, I guess this is a fair concern.

So why aren't comics selling today? Try this: comic books are not worth it.

I buy what I consider a lot of comics each month, on grad student wages. Probably 15 a month, which comes out to about $50. After clothing, housing/utilities, food, and school supplies like books, I would say I spend more on comics than any other single activity. I do it for enjoyment and out of a sense of loyalty for characters I've been following for 15 years.

But I actually liken it to a drug habit nowadays. Because economically, I'm wrong to be buying comics, particularly in a monthly format.

Let's call the standard Big 2 comic $2.50. I will be generous and say that it takes 15 minutes to read a book through (for some it's 5).

That's a cost of $10/hour of entertainment from a comic. It I read it twice (an unlikely proposition for all but the best each month), that's $5/hour I've spent.

But, in comparison:

-I can go to a 2-hour action movie, paying $10 for the ticket. I am still paying $5/hour for my entertainment.

-I can rent a 2-hour DVD for $3. I am now paying only $1.50/hour.

-I can buy one D&D 3rd Edition sourcebook a month for $30 (or an RPG about superheroes). Assuming I play 2/month for four hours each session, I am paying $3.25/hour. Obviously, if I buy only the PHB, after 6 months my investment/hour has gotten extremely small, since I am generating further entertainment off a one-time fixed cost combined with self-generated intellectual activity.

-I can buy a high-end videogame for $50 (even a game about superheroes). If we assume 20 hours of gameplay (most RPGs are 40-60, and some, like the Civilization series, have a re-play value in the 100s), I am paying $2.50/hour for my entertainment. We can tack on the costs of an MMRPG like City of Heroes, but it's still only $65/month for 40-60 hours of gameplay. Obviously, the fixed cost of the game is one-time.

-I can be old-fashioned, and buy a novel in paperback form for $15. I read fiction at about 1 page/minute, so a 300 page novel gives me five hours of entertainment, or $3/.

Note that I've actually spotted my comics habit several advantages, like any good addict. First, the actual cost of most top tier books is $3. Second, 10-12 of my 15 comics/month are read once, thrown into a longbox (more costs I'm not accounting for) and maybe pulled out once every five years when I feel like binging.

So, taking all that into account, if I'm in the target demographic for new comic readers (males from middle-class backgrounds, ages 10-13), why would I ever go into a comic store? Comic books are more expensive than just about every other form of comparable entertainment available to someone that age.

It's time to realize that the market has evolved beyond the monthly book, and act accordingly. I would keep a 3-pronged distribution strategy:

1. An ITunes format for major companies, say $1/book.
2. A TPB every six months, sold in bookstores. This will catch readers who "fear technology" and help draw in new readers.
3. An aggressive strategy to get the back catalogs onto CDs for sale in bookstores or game stores.

This would be a win-win-win situation. It would cut costs for the major companies and boost sales (current fans could buy twice as many books a month and save money, letting them experiment with titles they might not have bought otherwise). It helps the independent publisher by giving them higher potential exposure, as it's much easier to buy and operate the equipment needed to digitally self-publish than to try and do a print-run. It will also help the quality of the product; color print runs being notoriously costly. Finally, it helps the fans, who now have easier access and a permanently high-quality product and can buy more of the books they love each month.

The only real losers are your LCS and speculators. Mourn the death of the variant cover! And I'm not necessarily for keeping an antiquated method of distribution out of nostalgia, if it helps kill the industry as a consequence. After all, most people (in America, anyway) want to go to a supermarket instead of a mom'n'pop; they will take convenience and savings over personal connections to a grocer.

[Donald Stone]

Piracy exists, but it isn't nearly as large as movie or music piracy simple because the demand is smaller.

I download most new comics, in one way or another, the day they come out. I then read them, and the ones that I think are good are the ones i then buy on my trip to the comic store.

[dancj]

Even if a law is bad, one should be willing to accept the consequences of breaking it.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'accept'. If want to break a bad law I'll weigh up the chances of being caught and the penalty before doing so. If I'm caught I'll do whatever I can to get out of being punished and be really pissed off if I am punished.

Does that caount as accepting the consequences?

[Johnny Morningstar]

No harm, no foul my ass.

Say I produce an independent book out of my own pocket with a 1,000 press run.

Some jackass purchases, or more likely borrows because they can be bothered to pay for anything, and scans the pages. All of a sudden more people are downloading as many copies, or more, than I printed.

Nationwide, I sell a handfull of copies through conventions and Diamond.

It's nice to have the readers,but I have a roomfull of first issues because nobody could part with $3. And there goes the finances for a second issue.

Marvel and DC may be big companies, but they ain't that big. For nationally recognizable characters, the press runs are already pretty freaking low. Even if they were selling a bazillion copies per comic, swiping them is still wrong.

Downloadable comics are fine and a legit means of distribution, if that's how the comic owner/publisher wants the product to be dispersed in the first place.

[Heffaloo]

And if your comic wasn't good enough to inspire me to go buy a copy, then I say good riddance. There's more than enough bad comics to filter through.

[Ian Boothby]

No harm, no foul my ass.

Say I produce an independent book out of my own pocket with a 1,000 press run.

Some jackass purchases, or more likely borrows because they can be bothered to pay for anything, and scans the pages. All of a sudden more people are downloading as many copies, or more, than I printed.

Nationwide, I sell a handfull of copies through conventions and Diamond.

It's nice to have the readers,but I have a roomfull of first issues because nobody could part with $3. And there goes the finances for a second issue.

Marvel and DC may be big companies, but they ain't that big. For nationally recognizable characters, the press runs are already pretty freaking low. Even if they were selling a bazillion copies per comic, swiping them is still wrong.

Downloadable comics are fine and a legit means of distribution, if that's how the comic owner/publisher wants the product to be dispersed in the first place.


At least your work is being seen and you´re building an audience in that scenario.

[WatsonGlenn]

You have, yet again, asserted that it is taking money out of anyone's pocket without any evidence to back it up. There is no evidence to support that assertion.


Ok let me give you some evidence that Bit Torrent costs comic companies money. I used to spend about $80 a month on comics and have been buying for well over 20 years. Then I discovered BT. Now I spend $0 a month on comics and I read more than ever.

I don't consider it stealing I consider it sharing, but the reality is it has cost DC and Marvel some small amount of their usual income. Now multiply me by 10, 20 or 50 thousand and you're talking real money.

[khuxford]

You have, yet again, asserted that it is taking money out of anyone's pocket without any evidence to back it up. There is no evidence to support that assertion. None. Comics piracy is up, but sales are also up. Book authors like Cory Doctorow consistently point to increased sales by giving away their work. And so on.

You, sir, have made baseless allegations and propagated misinformation. You appear to know nothing about the issue in any context -- the legal issues, the economic issues or the moral issues.

Again, you are talking out of your ass and can be safely ignored.

When you're taking product without paying for it, you're keeping money out of people's pockets. You say you wouldn't buy it anyway...for ANY OF THOSE ISSUES...but who knows what you would have done to satisfy your curiousity on a few of those books if you didn't have any options like illegally downloaded comic books.

You defended it earlier by saying it wasn't stealing...just copyright infringement...bootlegging. People are illegally copying the work of others and distributing it (whether for money or for free)...and that is still about either making money on the work of others without permission or giving away the work of others in a manner that deprives the owner of related monies. It still works out to being about keeping money out of someone else's pocket. What motivation do you or anyone else have to buy the book if you know you can get it for free? You're keeping them from making money.

Of course you'll just continue to try to justify it so you think that you're not doing anything too devoid of ethics or morals. Have fun with that. :D

[Johnny Morningstar]

At least your work is being seen and you´re building an audience in that scenario.

But, what's the point? From the money side, a small press run could cost about $1,500 to $3,000 each issue. If somebody pirated the issue, competitively I would be losing money from my own product to a the person giving away my product for free.

Plus, there's no way to gauge the online readership because I'm not the sole possessor my comic's digital file(s).

Realistically, though, I would be stupid not to incorporate a web site with the small press comic.

[markus]

@khuxford
> ...who knows what you would have done to satisfy your curiousity on a few of those books if you didn't have any options like illegally downloaded comic books.
I do. I read them in the store or borrow them from a friend. Or I make do with free online previews and extensive reviews.
Besides, I very much doubt that curiousity sales are a major factor next to quality and/or fandom. Sure, it works for the hyped stuff from the big two and it might work for some indy small press titles (though here people are much more likely to have a look first IMHO), but beyond 1-2 issues?
So I'd say curiousity sales may be a valid argument in single issue sales terms (but then we'd have to counterbalance that with considerations of readership loss through dissapointment), but they are not something the industry as a whole can be sustained on and hence IMHO not particularly relevant to the overall "does p2p sharing hurt the industry" question.
Besides, see the moral dimension stuff below.

@Johnny Morningstar
I couldn't quite make sense of your last post, so I'll tackle the first one.
You are making a number of flattering assumptions in favour of the small time creator. For one, it's not as if everybody downloads everything, bandwith costs money after all. More importantly however, you presume that scan readership leads to lower sales. _Especially_ with small creator stuff, that is most likely wrong.
The "wouldn't have checked it for money but downloaded it and bought it" thing is pretty obvious, so allow me to cover a more convoluted case:
I infrequently download stuff that sounds vaguely interesting (after looking for a review/preview). Quite often, I delete the file after having read 4 pages because the comic in question is clearly not for me. In the case of small time stuff, where reviews are often hard to get, I just saved my LCS some money. They don't have to invest time and money into getting me the book to have a look, they don't waste shelf-space on the copy I decide not to buy after a quick look in store.
The creator/publisher is fine for the moment as they've already made the sale, nevermind the fact that the LCS gets to sit on the issue. But they quite likely might produce (= put time and money into) a second issue (based on "sales" of the first), which is sollicited but not ordered, falls below Diamond's new threshold and then sits in the creators basement in full, all 1000 issues.
Certainly no necessary chain of events, but not a far fetched one either and at the end of this particular chain everyone in it has profited from downloading AFAICT.


Moral angle:
Several people have adressed the illegal=wrong line of morality, which is obviously very limited. Democracy doesn't help either, and we don't even have to resort to Hitler's case, segregation does just as nicely. That doesn't mean that the law should not be enforced, but it means breaking it is not immoral in itself.
Another moral line of argument holds that we are being lied to. Creators, publishers, clerks constantly lie to us in order to get us to buy a particular book or comics in general. For whatever reasons we have decided that this particular form of lying is called "advertising" and that it's perfectly legal and morally ok. Whereas other, quite similar forms of deception, are called "swindle" and "fraud" and are condemned morally as well. IANAL, but AFAIK the distinction is taking into account both "technical correctness" of the statement in question and in the case of hype, whether the speaker could reasonably be pressumed to believe the sentence in question. Whatever the exact distinction, it's probably reasonable, but that doesn't make it any less arbitrary.
And it so happens that the line we currently draw favours producers of stuff over consumers of stuff (The information assymetry is reversed e.g. in health insurance, where the company does not know all your health risks, but you usually do.). The producer side is well aware of this, Hollywood is not spending up to half the total budget of a movie on advertising just for the fun of it.
Abstinence is one way of effecting change in this respect, but again the current state of affairs in copyright law makes it quite easy for e.g. DC to prevent anyone else from offering e.g. Batman-like stories under more honest conditions. Any company big enough to withstand a prolonged lawsuit (with or without merit) is likely to realise quickly which side the bread is buttered on and hence unlikely to pusue that venue.
So, at the end of the day, p2p, "theft without loss" seems like a quite moral course of action for anyone no longer willing to tolerate the lies society chose to call advertising. Provided of course that person is actually buying the good stuff after having checked it out.
((I'm not talking two wrongs make a right stuff here: "see before pay" merely circumvents the false/misleading information coming from the producer side much as a friend who is a good mechanic circumvents bad info from the car salesperson. That one is currently legal in the US and the other isn't is morally irrelevant. ))

[Birdcat]

Personally, I'm quite thankful for comic piracy. If it wasn't for scans on Newsgroups, I probably wouldn't have bought half the comics I buy monthly now. This I see no problem with. Downloading something to preview it. I do it with anime all the time, because I'm not going to spend $100 on a boxset I know nothing about.

Lets face it, the US economy sucks donkey balls. And its not going to 'get better' like it was before, not for a long while anyway. People just don't have a lot of money these days, so when something they purchase regularly starts sucking ass, they stop buying it. Now if they suddenly have access to it for free, then they'll probably go ahead and download it out of boredom. This isn't necassarily right, but thats simply how it is. If companies don't want to lose money, they need to change, simple fact.

Now at $2.13 to $2.99 a comic, if a reader buys 20 comics or so a month, they're spending $40 to $60 a month on comics. AND thats not counting tax/shipping, and box's and bags. With everyone's limited income these days, they're being FORCED to choose between their hobbies/forms of entertainment. And when they limit their spending, companies are like 'why aren't they spending so much anymore?". Because half the time quality+price=$nosale$.

I know it may seem like I've gone way off track here, but its all connected. I used to play video games all the time. But with all the rehashed crap out there, I can no longer justify spending $50 on a game thats probably going to suck. Not to mention I only finish one out of every five games I buy due to losing interest halfway through. It just isn't worth it anymore, developers are putting graphics over gamplay and story. With next generation console releases around the corner at $200 to $400, they are FORCING me to make a decision. Put my comic and anime buying on hold so I can buy new consoles and games that I mostly likely will not like or finish, or stop buying video games/consoles so I can afford the comics and anime that I KNOW I will enjoy. I can understand the reasoning behind downloading and not buying comics. That doesn't mean I support it, I just understand it.

[solid-one-love]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'accept'. If want to break a bad law I'll weigh up the chances of being caught and the penalty before doing so. If I'm caught I'll do whatever I can to get out of being punished and be really pissed off if I am punished.

Does that caount as accepting the consequences?

No. I think one needs to gracefully accept the punishment, should any come to be. That's a tenet at the heart of the civil disobedience movement.

[solid-one-love]

Ok let me give you some evidence that Bit Torrent costs comic companies money. I used to spend about $80 a month on comics and have been buying for well over 20 years. Then I discovered BT. Now I spend $0 a month on comics and I read more than ever.

I don't consider it stealing I consider it sharing, but the reality is it has cost DC and Marvel some small amount of their usual income. Now multiply me by 10, 20 or 50 thousand and you're talking real money.

That's anecdotal evidence, and is not compelling. All that matters is the overall sales trend. How many people were spending $0 and are now spending $80? There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that there are a number of people who are doing that -- the precise opposite of what you are doing. The reality is that DC and Marvel have lost your money, sure. But whose money have they *gained*? (I see that Birdcat has provided in this very thread some anecdotal evidence from the opposite side).

There were numerous credible studies that showed that Napster drove music sales up (and numerous less credible studies that showed the contrary). There are no such studies yet on how P2P filesharing has impacted comics sales. As such, there's no evidence for the assertion that it is hurting sales.

[solid-one-love]

When you're taking product without paying for it, you're keeping money out of people's pockets.

This is an unsupported assertion.

You say you wouldn't buy it anyway...for ANY OF THOSE ISSUES...but who knows what you would have done to satisfy your curiousity on a few of those books if you didn't have any options like illegally downloaded comic books.

I have not said that I wouldn't buy it anyway. I'm pretty sure that I haven't said anything about my personal reading habits. And, again, it's not illegal everywhere. The current legal wisdom is that it is not illegal where I live, for example. So, for the sake of argument, assuming that I am downloading, I would not be doing it illegally.

You defended it earlier by saying it wasn't stealing...just copyright infringement

Actually, again, no. I didn't defend the act by saying that it was not stealing; I was citing a point of fact: it is not stealing.

bootlegging. People are illegally copying the work of others and distributing it (whether for money or for free)...and that is still about either making money on the work of others without permission

I do not support piracy for profit. I applaud EBay for shutting down auctions of DVDs full of pirated comics, for example.

or giving away the work of others in a manner that deprives the owner of related monies.

This is, again, an unsupported assertion.

It still works out to being about keeping money out of someone else's pocket. What motivation do you or anyone else have to buy the book if you know you can get it for free?

What reason do I have to buy a $75 Watchmen collection in the Absolute format when I already own it in serial, trade, and Grafiitti limited edition?

You're keeping them from making money.

The third time you have made this unsupported assertion. If you can figure out how this assertion can be supported, please let the Business Software Association know, because they've been trying to show how potential loss of sales equals actual loss of sales for nigh on twenty-five years without success.

Of course you'll just continue to try to justify it so you think that you're not doing anything too devoid of ethics or morals. Have fun with that. :D

1. There is no evidence of harm.
2. It's not illegal in many places outside the US.

I'm trying to figure out how the act can therefore be viewed as unethical or immoral. Maybe you can provide some evidence to bolster your case. Such as evidence that it's hurting sales (good luck) or otherwise causing harm (good luck). Or a compelling argument why the laws in the US are more just than those in other countries (good luck).

But in the meantime, I think the rest of us can agree that, like your predecessor, you're talking out of your ass and can safely be ignored.

[solid-one-love]

@khuxford
> ...who knows what you would have done to satisfy your curiousity on a few of those books if you didn't have any options like illegally downloaded comic books.
I do. I read them in the store or borrow them from a friend. Or I make do with free online previews and extensive reviews.

Or libraries. Here in Canada, it is perfectly legal for me to go to the library, take a graphic novel or comic off the shelf, drop some dimes into the photocopier, and make as many copies as I want. And the publisher will not see one cent (unless the publisher is Canadian, in which case he will receive a cheque a couple of times a year from CanCopy based on the tariffs levied on photocopiers, toner, blank CD-ROMs and so forth). Absolutely legal; an aspect of fair use that is firmly entrenched in the Canadian Copyright Act. I can even borrow the book and scan it. The conventional legal wisdom is that it is then legal for me to upload it to any number of people.

And, like you said, I can borrow them from a friend. I sometimes wonder if the anti-sharing advocates never loan out their comics. I never would have gotten into Warren Ellis had a friend not loaned me his early Stormwatch issues, for example.

I see a lot of arguments that sharing hurts sales; on the face of it, it seems obvious that it would. But when you look at the issue more deeply, the opposite view tends to come into focus.

[WatsonGlenn]

That's anecdotal evidence, and is not compelling. All that matters is the overall sales trend.

I gave you a hard piece of evidence that Marvel and DC are losing $80 a month due to my use of Internet downloading. I'm not stealing it I'm just no longer giving it to them. That's irrefutable, unless you think I am lying.

You respond by saying maybe other people are buying more comics because of Internet downloading. Well maybe they are but I don't see it. And there is no evidence to support that assertion.

There is evidence to support the assertion that fewer people are buying comics. You can't blame that on the Internet but it damn sure is not helping.

Its the perfect storm for comic books.
Computer games + the outrageous cost of comics + an aging audience and now Internet downloading. The fat lady is singing and Stan Lee is making movies. Paper has given us a long ride but the computer screen you are looking at is the future.

[solid-one-love]

I gave you a hard piece of evidence that Marvel and DC are losing $80 a month due to my use of Internet downloading.

Again, this is anecdotal evidence, and not compelling. That DC and Marvel have lost your $80 does not negate the possibility that the availability of pirated comics has increased their profits in other ways. Whether or not you are telling the truth or lying is absolutely irrelevant. You are a single data point; one cannot draw a trend from your experience alone. And we're not talking about $80 a month -- we are talking about whether or not the industry has been hurt by downloading.

If your $80 is offset by other people buying more (like Birdman, earlier), then the industry has lost no money. We don't care about one person's experience, alone. That is analogous to making the claim that the used bookstore industry is hurting the publishing industry because you or I or some guy we know has stopped buying books at retail and now only buys them used, which doesn't put any money into the pockets of the publishers. We have anecdotal evidence, but it's only one data point and it may be offset by other data points. Perhaps for every Joe Used Book Buyer there's a woman who buys more new books than she otherwise might have because the existence of used bookstores allows her to recoup some of her investment by making it easier for her to resell them. But the data point we poll from her experience is also not compelling evidence that used bookstores are increasing publisher profits.

You get what I'm saying? It doesn't matter if you've stopped buying comics. It doesn't matter if you're lying. You are one data point. That's not evidence of a trend, and we're talking about trends.

We need a sample size of several hundred people in order to be able to support the assertion that the industry is losing money. And we need to do the survey more than once.

You respond by saying maybe other people are buying more comics because of Internet downloading. Well maybe they are but I don't see it. And there is no evidence to support that assertion.

So let me get this straight: you are saying that your anecdotal claim is evidence, but the anecdotal claims of others in this thread are not?

I have made it pretty clear that no anecdotal claim is compelling. Not yours, not his, not anyone's. Your claim is evidence that Marvel and DC have, combined, lost $80 in sales per month. It is not evidence that they have lost sales overall due to downloading.

The nub of the claim being made is that downloading is hurting the comic book business. Your anecdotal statement does not support that claim. You do not live in a vacuum. You are using the same tools as the other doanloaders, many of whom claim that they are buying more. A recent poll on one discussion group relating to downloading suggested that people who download were, over all, buying more than they used to. That said, the people polled were a self-selecting sample, which lessens or negates the credibility of the poll.

There is evidence to support the assertion that fewer people are buying comics.

Actually, there isn't. Unit and dollar sales have increased steadily in the last three years. So has downloading. There isn't enough evidence to draw a causal relationship, but it certainly weakens the assertion that downloading is hurting sales.

If you could point to a downward trend in unit and dollar sales, then you would have evidence to support the assertion that it was hurting the industry. Not strong evidence, but evidence nonetheless.

[WatsonGlenn]

Again, this is anecdotal evidence, and not compelling.

Its not compelling to you but it is a fact that DC and Marvel are losing out on my particular $80 a month. Whether that is offset by other monies has yet ot be proven.

That DC and Marvel have lost your $80 does not negate the possibility that the availability of pirated comics has increased their profits in other ways.

No it does not negate it but you have yet to prove it either. Its a supposition on your part and an unlikely one IMO.

we are talking about whether or not the industry has been hurt by downloading.

And I have showed you that in one particular instance at least they have.

If your $80 is offset by other people buying more (like Birdman, earlier), then the industry has lost no money.

That's true, IF. But I see no reason to believe that your scenario is true or even reasonable.

We don't care about one person's experience, alone.

You seem to care about Birdman's personal experience. You have brough it up more than once. Is it only the personal experiences that support your position that are useful?

Perhaps for every Joe Used Book Buyer there's a woman who buys more new books than she otherwise might have because the existence of used bookstores

Maybe but now you are just guessing again. I can buy used book cheaper than new books so often I will. Clearly used book stores cut into the profit of new book stores.

we're talking about trends.

And the trend is that comic books sales are down. Now why is that happening? I think the Internet is partially to blame. I know it is respnsable for $80 of that decline

Your claim is evidence that Marvel and DC have, combined, lost $80 in sales per month. It is not evidence that they have lost sales overall due to downloading.

Comic book sales are down. One small and growing reason is downloading. You say I have not proven this. Maybe thats true. But I have provided evidence that it is a likely cause of financial worry for DC and Marvel.

[solid-one-love]

There's clearly no point in discussing the issue with you, since you are either willfuly misreading what I have written or simply don't have the basic capicity for reason.

Plus. your knowledge of the issue is minimal -- comics sales are at their highest levels since the mid-90s. Sales are not down. I can't imagine how you think they're down; they've been up every year for the last three years. They are predicting $350 million in retail sales this year, the highest number since 1996. September 2005 sales of the top 300 copies amounted to 6.74 million pieces, 16% higher than for the same number of ship weeks one year earlier. You believe things that are demonstrably not true. This hurts the credibility of your stated opinions.

You have not shown that the industry has been hurt. You have asserted that you are not spending as much money as you have been. Your assertion is equally as valid as any other claim (it is a logical fallacy to assume that your own experience is more valid than that of others, which is precisely what you're asserting), and, regardless, it is not evidence of a trend, which is the issue. Here's another anology: your claim that you not spending $80 a month is evidence that the industry is losing money is analogous to the claim that since you have the flu, there is an epidemic.

It does not follow logically. One data point is not evidence of a trend. Ever. Even if it's your personal experience.

And no, I am not guessing about the used bookstore analogy; there is ample evidence that the existence of used book stores is good for publishers, even though it would seem, on the face of it, that the opposite would be true.

You are ignorant of the facts and don't want to learn. Have fun believing what you want to believe.

[solid-one-love]

Message deleted by author.

[moebius]

Its not compelling to you but it is a fact that DC and Marvel are losing out on my particular $80 a month. Whether that is offset by other monies has yet ot be proven.


I am going with Solid_One_Love on this one: WatsonGlenn, you don't know what you're talking about.

In social science, it's called the "Small N" problem: you cannot make reasonable inferences off one or a few observations.

I understand that you no longer pay $80 a month for comic books. That doesn't make you representative of the downloading comic book readership. I am 5'11". That doesn't mean all people are 5'11", nor does it mean that the average for males is anywhere near 5'11". Without a large enough sample size, picking any one is meaningless.

The cutoff between "Medium" and "Large" N is roughly 150. If you can randomly select 150 downloaders (and randomly is important; otherwise it's just me getting my friends and you getting yours), and you find that on average they are spending less on comic books than they were before, then that is some hard evidence. The larger your "N" (sample size), the more legitmate your findings will look (assuming unbiased sampling with no measurement error).

WatsonGlenn, what you have done is you have generated a valid hypothesis: "People who download cost the comic industry money". Solid_One_Love has presented an alternative hypothesis based on other pieces of evidence: "Downloading exposes users to new materials and serves as an incentive to buy more than they otherwise would". Neither hypothesis has been proven; further study is needed. Solid understands what the scientific community, were they to care about this issue, sees as a very basic methodological fact.

[moebius]

I can buy used book cheaper than new books so often I will. Clearly used book stores cut into the profit of new book stores.


This is exactly what scientific evidence isn't. "I do something, so therefore everyone must do something."

[WatsonGlenn]

There's clearly no point in discussing the issue with you, since you are either willfuly misreading what I have written or simply don't have the basic capicity for reason.

Maybe if you used smaller words.

[WatsonGlenn]

I understand that you no longer pay $80 a month for comic books. That doesn't make you representative of the downloading comic book readership. I am 5'11". That doesn't mean all people are 5'11", nor does it mean that the average for males is anywhere near 5'11". Without a large enough sample size, picking any one is meaningless.

I'm sorry but that does not make any sense. There are free comic book available online. Comics cost $3.00 each and many of them stink. And yet some people are unwilling to accept the notion that the ability to download comics has hurt the industry. I don;t have to pull out the scientific method to figure this out. At least you are able to discuss the issue without becoming insulting.


WatsonGlenn, what you have done is you have generated a valid hypothesis: "People who download cost the comic industry money". Solid_One_Love has presented an alternative hypothesis based on other pieces of evidence: "Downloading exposes users to new materials and serves as an incentive to buy more than they otherwise would". Neither hypothesis has been proven; further study is needed. Solid understands what the scientific community, were they to care about this issue, sees as a very basic methodological fact.

I agree but don't pretend that P2Ps like Bittorrent and the like are not having a negative effect on comic sales. Have i proven to to a scientific certainty? No, but clearly they are. It unreasonable to say otherwise.

[WatsonGlenn]

This is exactly what scientific evidence isn't. "I do something, so therefore everyone must do something."

Are you saying I am the only one that buys used books? This is ridiculous.

[moebius]

I'm sorry but that does not make any sense. There are free comic book available online. Comics cost $3.00 each and many of them stink. And yet some people are unwilling to accept the notion that the ability to download comics has hurt the industry. I don;t have to pull out the scientific method to figure this out. At least you are able to discuss the issue without becoming insulting.

I agree but don't pretend that P2Ps like Bittorrent and the like are not having a negative effect on comic sales. Have i proven to to a scientific certainty? No, but clearly they are. It unreasonable to say otherwise.

It would seem that this is the truth, and intuitively it should be so, but do we have any proof beyond individual anecdotes. If anyone tried to write a serious study off the anecdotes on this thread (for either side) and submit it to a real scientific journal, they'd be laughed out of the review.

In science, particularly social science where we're dealing with human beings or social interaction, we are constantly running into irrational behavior or counter-intuitive situations. You have taken a very "hard" rational choice view of downloading; it saves me money I would have otherwise spent, therefore it is rational for me to put my resources in things other than comicbooks.

But take my experience with MP3s, for example. Trying out the MP3s of certain bands were directly responsible for my getting interested in those bands, becoming a fan, and buying the CDs and going to concerts. I am a very cautious buyer (even listening in the stores isn't enough), and so I can say with 99% certainty that I spent more money than I otherwise would have thanks to MP3s.

So, from my experience, it's clear that downloading is a good thing for the industry. But I admit that it doesn't prove anything.

And since we're talking in circles, I'll stop now.

[WatsonGlenn]

It would seem that this is the truth, and intuitively it should be so, but do we have any proof beyond individual anecdotes.

My first question is off topic. Are you the real Moebius? If so I love your artwork. My second question is why do you need statistical evidence to take seriously such an obvious reality.

Try this analogy. If Nestles started to give away all their candy bars for free don't you think that would cut into Hershey's profits? Yes, I know I have no scientific evidence to back up this assertion but THINK MAN!!!

And since we're talking in circles, I'll stop now.

Well shoot I wish you had said that at the beginning.

[Denyer]

It IS Theft, no matter what way you try to condone it. Quit using the word 'theft', and you may find more people prepared to agree with you.

As a rule I don't buy books without having read them first. There are exceptions (such as Peter David's New Frontier books) but they're rare. As a result of being able borrow from friends, download and check books out from libraries, I've bought a ton of collections I wouldn't otherwise have, and have a list of stuff to pick up in future. Paper copies are nice to have, just as plastic copies of music are nice to have.

If you can't afford it , or don't have any intentions of paying for it, then leave it alone. Indeed, and we should burn libraries, and everyone must keep their copies of any IP that they've licensed in secluded rooms, and never let anyone else near. The sharing of stories and knowledge must be verboten.

Balderdash. Sales are made through word-of-mouth and borrowing. However much advertising departments would like to self-justify, they aren't solely the result of marketing campaigns.

if a law is bad, one should be willing to accept the consequences of breaking it.I'm sure those incarcerated without trial or tortured agree. We also live in a world in which the vast majority of people break licensing on a daily basis: recording from TV, transcoding music for personal players, etc. If there were more respect for consumers in those licenses, there might be more respect for IP—when people are treated as criminals by default, they tend to pursue that pattern of behaviour.

[moebius]

1. No, I am not the actual Moebius.

2. You need statistical evidence because a sample of one is almost never representative.

You have offered a very compelling hypothesis, which rests in "common sense" and would be accepted by the rational choice crowd in acadaemia. However, I guarantee you with 100% certainty that even those people who thought you were right would not accept your "evidence" as it currently stands. It's like going out, asking ten people who they voted for in the Presidential election. You will get (probably) a lot of well reasoned answers. But you are nowhere near the "truth," because you don't know how representative your sample is. In fact, because your sample is so small, you could get something like Person A winning with 90% of the vote.

Taking a small sample, or going out and studying one or two countries is how most political scientists generate their hypotheses. The problem is when they try and use those one or two observations to put forward something as gospel. There's just too much information they aren't taking into account.

Here's how you might set up an experiment to test your hypothesis against mine or Solid's.

Start by looking at industry figures for the last 10, 15 years, and compare them to when people started downloading and what the volume was.

These numbers are something that can be reasonably determined. If sales went down, you might have an argument. Of course, you also have to disprove alternative hypotheses (for example, our economy has been crap for 5 years; how do we know decreased sales aren't just part of a general trend?). If sales went up, it's still possible that downloading means they went up less than they otherwise would have.

A better way to prove this would be to look at the downloaders themselves.

Lets say there are 50,000 downloaders. Go out and do a survey of roughly 500 (online, for ex.). Determine what the mean difference is in the amount of money they spend today and five years ago (before they were downloading). Then go out and interview 50 of them. Look for "causal mechanisms," reasons that their buying habits changed (or didn't) since the "before" period. Again, it's possible they are buying less (or more) for reasons completely unrelated to downloading.

The larger your sample, and the closer it gets to the true population, the more likely you are to have the "correct" answer. Ideally, you sample the entire population (even the US Census doesn't accomplish this).

[WatsonGlenn]

Actually, there isn't. Unit and dollar sales have increased steadily in the last three years. So has downloading. There isn't enough evidence to draw a causal relationship, but it certainly weakens the assertion that downloading is hurting sales.

If you could point to a downward trend in unit and dollar sales, then you would have evidence to support the assertion that it was hurting the industry. Not strong evidence, but evidence nonetheless.


Here is what Eric Larson says.:

"Sales on many books are not particularly healthy. The voyeurs-- the "fans" that post instead of purchasing-- are quick to point out how expensive comics are, but if publishers slashed their prices in half it wouldn't fix anything and to those already getting free entertainment, any price is too much to pay."

I agree with the editor of Image. Comic sales are not doing well.

[WatsonGlenn]

I guarantee you with 100% certainty that even those people who thought you were right would not accept your "evidence" as it currently stands.

If by that you mean "accept what I say as absolute truth," I agree. But we both know I am probably right. This is not a symposium and I am not submitting my doctoral thesis. I'm probably right. That's good enough for a comic message board.

[moebius]

Here is what Eric Larson says.:

"Sales on many books are not particularly healthy. The voyeurs-- the "fans" that post instead of purchasing-- are quick to point out how expensive comics are, but if publishers slashed their prices in half it wouldn't fix anything and to those already getting free entertainment, any price is too much to pay."

I agree with the editor of Image. Comic sales are not doing well.


You're cherry picking. Larsen ALSO says:

"But things are bouncing back. Comics are selling better than they were a couple years ago, but nowhere near as well as in years past. The sales of books of collected works are on the rise (Moebius: ie, TPBs). We're far from doomed. "

The comic companies worked over the fans in the early 90s with variant covers and pointless, fan-offensive stories (ie the Clone Saga and Emerald Twilight). Fans paid them back by takeing their money elsewhere.

Ten years later, some creators are doing some very good things, and the fans started coming back, but not in the same numbers.

So, if we are to take Larsen's column as the Gospel, you are objectively wrong that comics sales have dropped; they have gone up at the same time as downloading. It is however possible that downloading has meant that comics didn't recover as much as they would have.

Also note the rise of the TPB. How much is direct sales hurt by downloading, and how much by people "waiting for the trades?" How much is the market hurt by CBR and other reviewers? If I read consistently bad reviews of a comic, I don't have to go and buy it; the boom of Internet reviewing could have also blunted the recovery. That was part of Larsen's point.

[WatsonGlenn]

We are both cherry picking. We are both presenting ideas, opinions and facts that support our position. Its OK to disagree. But I'm still probably right about downloading hurting comic sales.

You really have not taken a strong position. Do you believe downloading hurts, helps or has no effect on comic sales?

[moebius]

We are both cherry picking. We are both presenting ideas, opinions and facts that support our position. Its OK to disagree. But I'm still probably right about downloading hurting comic sales.

You really have not taken a strong position. Do you believe downloading hurts, helps or has no effect on comic sales?

I really don´t know. I am willing to wait until someone (NOT the industry) does a study.

Based on my experience with MP3s, I can only say that downloading brought the music industry my money. Before MP3s I hardly ever bought music. I am fairly picky in my purchasing, and I wouldn´t go to music stores often. I started collecting MP3s in college. When I found a band that I liked, I would pick up the CD; this usually took a month or so of heavy listening. For bands I REALLY liked, I started going to concerts. It´s not that I got older and my purchasing power increased; I still buy very few CDs and go to no more than 1 concert a year. It´s just that MP3s have made it easier for me to get an honest opinion of a band, so I´m more willing to pick up a CD (and CDs from similar sounding bands).

For comics, it´s a little different. I spend about $50 a month on comics. I currently live in Europe, so my LCS is keeping my pull list for me. I expect a pretty heavy bill and a couple days of intense reading when I get home. In the meanwhile, I´m using downloading to catch up on the books I REALLY want to read (ie Infinite Crisis). But I´ll still buy them when I get back. Mostly it´s out of completism, though I´m thinking about dropping comics in general soon (what WOULD keep me in is a switch to electronic and a price drop to $1, a la ITUNES).

What HAS lowered my monthly outlay is CBR, the Fourth Rail, the X-Axis, and other review sites. After 4 months of hearing how bad House of M is, I now have no desire to go out and buy it.

[WatsonGlenn]

After 4 months of hearing how bad House of M is, I now have no desire to go out and buy it.


I've enjoyed House or M. I'm a sucker for those alternate reality/Elseworld/What If type comics.

[mistervader]

WatsonGlenn, I think he's sitting on the fence because there just really isn't enough incontrovertible proof for either side.

Look at this way...

product samples should detract from sales, because they give away free stuff, right?

But instead, it spikes up purchases.

Not the best analogy, but that at least somewhat goes against the grain of what is intuitively supposed to drop sales.

[WatsonGlenn]

product samples should detract from sales, because they give away free stuff, right? But instead, it spikes up purchases.

Good point and you're right it does bolster the other sides argument, but the difference is obvious. Every mainstream comic in America can now be found quickly and easily online for free. Not just some, but all of them. That's different from a free sample.

[Rosie]

Does that justify you stealing? When you steal for whatever reason, You are taking away from everyone who had a hand in publishing that book. I heard the movie "elektra" sucked balls, but I won't download it to check for the accuracy of that statement. If you can't afford it , or don't have any intentions of paying for it, then leave it alone. You are a thief, and should be prosecuted as such.

Sorry for the bump, but I'll admit to getting most of my comics from scans lately.

Simply put, I was running out of money buying comics and needed another way. I've tried to buy at least a few comics or piece of merchandise from my favourite publishers(I do this with bands where I can), and I intend to buy some more from publishers I support in future.

I simply couldn't continue to pay 20 Euros a pop for a book that only lasts a few hours at best.

I now collect action figures instead of comics, very often of the same comics I read and download, so where exactly are they loosing money?

I don't see any reason to miss out on so many comics I wouldn't find elsewhere.

Yes, it's illegal, but that doesn't make it wrong.

Anti-piracy agencies would do a lot better if they learned that piracy can't be destroyed, so work with it instead. The truth is that most people prefer to have the original if it's cheaply available to them - they should research cheaper methods of producing TPBs, etc, etc.

Comapnies need to learn to work *with* Piracy and except that it's a limitation of any non solid format, instead of trying to rewrite the rules of reality. If they focus on reducing piracy instead of erradicating it, it would be better for everyone.

With Video Games, quite simply put, Quake 4 costs 60 Euros. I have no reason to shell out that much for a game that probably runs like shit on my computer.

Not only that, it's far more convenient to buy than to download - it's pretty impossible to find games online, unless they're very old ones, in which case, the Underdogs is a most wonderful resource.

I'm sorry, but "do-gooders" like you - I don't know how you live with the guilt that you support sending mostly decent people, that could be just as good, if not better people than you to jail just because they used technology in a manner that wasn't really hurting anyone.

Besides, Marvel gets tons of my money from my Marvel Legends collection.

[dancj]

Not only that, it's far more convenient to buy than to download - it's pretty impossible to find games online, unless they're very old ones, in which case, the Underdogs is a most wonderful resource.

Not really. If you use bittorrent it's incredibly easy to have any major release within a week of it coming out. This was even true for Halflife 2 which had huge (and unreasonable) amounts of anti-piracy measures

Dan

[comicartfan]

I'm sorry, but "do-gooders" like you - I don't know how you live with the guilt that you support sending mostly decent people, that could be just as good, if not better people than you to jail just because they used technology in a manner that wasn't really hurting anyone.

So you wait , what, a month after i originally posted a reply about stealing to insult me?

Yes, it's illegal, but that doesn't make it wrong."
That has to be the most ludicrous statement I have ever read.
Look, if it was food that you needed and you had no money , I could understand that, You need food to survive, hell, I would even send you money and or food if you needed it. But these are comic books, luxury items that you CAN live without. You admitted that it is illegal, but you see no problem stealing them. I'll make you a deal. Write to an Artist or Writer of ANY mainstream comic book ,(Better yet, Ask Kurt Busiek,Gail Simone, Peter David or Geoff Johns ,since they post here semi-regularly) and plead your case with them and ask if they agree with you. Have them post their response here, and if they Do agree with you, I will never say another negative thing about piracy.In fact, I will un register and Never post on this site again. Fair Enough?

[roguespirit]

So you wait , what, a month after i originally posted a reply about stealing to insult me?


That has to be the most ludicrous statement I have ever read.
Look, if it was food that you needed and you had no money , I could understand that, You need food to survive, hell, I would even send you money and or food if you needed it. But these are comic books, luxury items that you CAN live without. You admitted that it is illegal, but you see no problem stealing them. I'll make you a deal. Write to an Artist or Writer of ANY mainstream comic book ,(Better yet, Ask Kurt Busiek,Gail Simone, Peter David or Geoff Johns ,since they post here semi-regularly) and plead your case with them and ask if they agree with you. Have them post their response here, and if they Do agree with you, I will never say another negative thing about piracy.In fact, I will un register and Never post on this site again. Fair Enough?

I think thats a really good suggestion about trying to get some creators opinions. But calm down my friend no ones asking you to dissappear.

For the record and I've stated this many times about downloading.

I do not think my downloading activity robs anyone for the following reasons

1) I only download stuff I have a very vague interest in but would bever buy anyway. This has actually resulted in me going out and buying back issues and subscribing to several titles such as Invincible. The net gain here is to the comics company and creators.

2) see no.1

[Rosie]

Not really. If you use bittorrent it's incredibly easy to have any major release within a week of it coming out. This was even true for Halflife 2 which had huge (and unreasonable) amounts of anti-piracy measures

Dan

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of that not everyone has uber-fast connections, and at 4 gigs a pop modern PC games aren't the quickest to download.

And the people that *do* have uber-fast connections are often people on student networks, who the makers of most filesharing programs, save DC++, don't give a toss about.

So you wait , what, a month after i originally posted a reply about stealing to insult me?

I don't know if I've even been here a month. I only just saw it now. It's pretty stupid that you think I've actually been waiting that long, but whatever works in your crazed little head.

That has to be the most ludicrous statement I have ever read.

Yeah, because all laws are absolutely perfect and anyone who rebels against anything is automatically selfish/immature, because, you know, that's what the people with guns tell you, so it MUST be true.

Yay American values!

Look, if it was food that you needed and you had no money , I could understand that, You need food to survive, hell, I would even send you money and or food if you needed it. But these are comic books, luxury items that you CAN live without.

You admitted that it is illegal, but you see no problem stealing them.

You have a very black and white mindset. This means you think in inferior moral terms, unfortunately.

I'll make you a deal. Write to an Artist or Writer of ANY mainstream comic book ,(Better yet, Ask Kurt Busiek,Gail Simone, Peter David or Geoff Johns ,since they post here semi-regularly) and plead your case with them and ask if they agree with you.

I don't care if they agree with me or not. They'd be even more emotionally biased than you would.

I, for one, however, would much rather if someone got to read my comic, my creation, than didn't, even if they don't give me money for it. I want my imagination to reach people, and I don't care how.

I mean, so what? As long as people get to read my comic, and I get paid enough to live a decent life and afford some guitar pedals, comics/books and action figures every so often, I don't really care. The only reason I'd want to be rich would be to give the money to a decent cause.

Money changes people, unfotunately.

I don't care so much about wads of money, as long as I have just enough. I do care about reaching people with my creations and messages, though, and I'm glad that people who couldn't afford my comics can get them for free, I'll probably make money off them at some point through merchandising, anyway.

Being an artist isn't about money, of course they should be paid, but piracy will never truly harm that. It's about creating. Clearly, your little capitalist brain doesn't understand that.

Have them post their response here, and if they Do agree with you, I will never say another negative thing about piracy.

Yeah, if I can do impossible thing X, you'll shut up. Great deal, moron.

In fact, I will un register and Never post on this site again. Fair Enough?

Quite frankly, I think most of us wish you'd do that anyway.

You argue completely out of emotive terms and ridiuclous bias. You refuse to accept actual statistics and research and go on things like "Well it MUST be true". You lost this argument a month ago. Go watch the sun revolve around the earth, dear.

[roguespirit]

I don't care if they agree with me or not. They'd be even more emotionally biased than you would.


Whats that got to do with it its still a valid opinion and your sounding fairly emotional right now


Being an artist isn't about money, of course they should be paid, but piracy will never truly harm that. It's about creating. Clearly, your little capitalist brain doesn't understand that.


Like you said they gotta eat


Yeah, if I can do impossible thing X, you'll shut up. Great deal, moron.



not so impossible as some of these creators can be contacted fairly easy, you need to chill out a bit

Quite frankly, I think most of us wish you'd do that anyway.

You argue completely out of emotive terms and ridiuclous bias. You refuse to accept actual statistics and research and go on things like "Well it MUST be true". You lost this argument a month ago. Go watch the sun revolve around the earth, dear.

I'm actually on your side for most of this but is this tone really neccesary

[comicartfan]

You know Rosie, you are completely FUCKED in the head.you pulled that shit out of your ass to justify stealing, fuck you. I don't agree with all of "Our" laws either, yet I try to go the proper way of helping to change them. You remind me of a pothead I knew many years ago, (even though I DO believe marijuana Should be available to sick and hurting people), he just decided to light up in front of a police department because he felt that even though it was illegal, it shouldn't be and decided to park his stupid ass and blow smoke at a cop, guess what, he's still in prison. So even though we have laws, if we feel they should be broken, we should go ahead and break them?! Like I said, you are fucked and your rationale is as full of shit as yourself. Now go stuff another cheeseburger in your gullet and suffocate.

[roguespirit]

ok you guys just wanna throw mud at each other. fine I just clocked this topic and was hoping for a good discussion but hey ho internet slander wins the day again

[Rosie]

You know Rosie, you are completely FUCKED in the head.you pulled that shit out of your ass to justify stealing, fuck you.

You were told not to use the world "stealing" if you wanted to be taken seriously. You were told not to use emotionally loaded terms if you wanted to be taken seriously.

These two lines make you look like a complete joke.

I don't agree with all of "Our" laws either, yet I try to go the proper way of helping to change them.

Good for you. And what have you achieved doing so..?

You remind me of a pothead I knew many years ago, (even though I DO believe marijuana Should be available to sick and hurting people), he just decided to light up in front of a police department because he felt that even though it was illegal, it shouldn't be and decided to park his stupid ass and blow smoke at a cop, guess what, he's still in prison.

And the fact that you're so obviously happy about that makes me think you are a very sick minded human being indeed.

That was a protest, and he was a martyr. Stupid as it was, at least he, unlike you, had a backbone.

You will never change the world. At least I have a chance.

So even though we have laws, if we feel they should be broken, we should go ahead and break them?!

This is all so shocking for you, isn't it? I guess you'll just have to live with people having different views on how to deal with injustice. We're not the ones shoving our views down your throat, incidentally. What does that say about you?

Like I said, you are fucked and your rationale is as full of shit as yourself. Now go stuff another cheeseburger in your gullet and suffocate.

I get the feeling you're going to be getting in trouble fairly soon, dear. It's hilarious that in your standing up for the rules and laws of society, you paid little to no regard to those of this forum.

Oops.

[Charles RB]

Sorry for the bump, but I'll admit to getting most of my comics from scans lately.

Simply put, I was running out of money buying comics and needed another way.

Alternatively, you could just go without them.

Downloading comics that aren't in print anymore and you can only get via Ebay? That's a good reason to download and tricky for opponents to argue against. Downloading comics to see what they're like before buying them, or not buying them if they turn out to be naff? Easier to argue against, but a good reason. Downloading comics that aren't available to buy where you live? A good reason.

Downloading comics because you can't be bothered to pay for them? That's not a good reason. I wouldn't exactly call it stealing, because no physical copy of the comic has been taken, but it's just a crappy thing to do.

I now collect action figures instead of comics, very often of the same comics I read and download, so where exactly are they loosing money?

This is a flawed assumption on several levels.

a) Most of the money you get from buying the toys goes to the toy company.
b) The comic doesn't make money from you buying the toys. If everyone buys Green Lantern toys but don't buy Green Lantern comics, the toys are profitable but the comic isn't. So it gets cancelled.
c) The writers and artists only get paid if the comic sticks around. The comic becomes unprofitable, they aren't getting paid to work on it anymore.

Also, action figures generally cost more than comics. Maybe if you stopped buying them, you could buy more comics. I mean, duh.

I don't see any reason to miss out on so many comics I wouldn't find elsewhere.

Earlier you said you download because you don't want to pay for them. That means you can find them. So is it because you can't pay for them or because you can't find them?

And not buying them is a very good reason to miss out. If I don't buy the latest Punisher, I miss out on the latest Punisher. It's cause and effect.

With Video Games, quite simply put, Quake 4 costs 60 Euros. I have no reason to shell out that much for a game that probably runs like shit on my computer.

What's that got to do with anything? You don't have to buy Quake 4.

Besides, Marvel gets tons of my money from my Marvel Legends collection.

None of which helps keep the comics going, and most of which profits Toy Biz rather than the publishing section of Marvel. You buy Spider-Man toys, it helps keep Spider-Man's toyline going but it doesn't help Friendly Neighbourhood Spider-Man.

You have a very black and white mindset. This means you think in inferior moral terms, unfortunately.

None of which contradicts his point that you have no problem breaking the law.

I don't care if they agree with me or not. They'd be even more emotionally biased than you would.

Well, yes, because if people download their new comics but don't ever buy them (as opposed to downloading, saying "ooh, neat", and buying it later), that comic makes less money, and if a comic makes less money it gets cancelled and they're out of a job. Yes, creators are likely to be biased.

I, for one, however, would much rather if someone got to read my comic, my creation, than didn't, even if they don't give me money for it. I want my imagination to reach people, and I don't care how.

On the other hand, people who actually write comics would rather someone got to read their creation, and then gave them money for it so they could keep on creating. Very few people are going to create full-time if they can't pay the mortgage, buy food and all that good stuff. And if they can't create full time? They lose out and so do we.

I mean, so what? As long as people get to read my comic, and I get paid enough to live a decent life

Except if not enough people buy the comic in sufficient numbers to keep it going, they don't get paid. And if they're independent creators or self-publishers, that's a serious issue; self-publishers and small companies end up in debt if they don't make enough money, never mind making enough to live a decent life.

If it's comics that are no longer in print, I doubt they'll be displeased with the fact people are still reading it and raving about it, and it could lead to someone re-publishing it in the future. But with recent stuff?

I'll probably make money off them at some point through merchandising, anyway.

How? If your creation isn't getting good enough sales figures, who's going to want to merchandise it? And if you're doing work-for-hire, you get no money from merchandise.

Being an artist isn't about money, of course they should be paid, but piracy will never truly harm that.

Piracy can truly harm whether or not a creator gets paid if too many people are downloading and not actually buying an indie or small-press title.

That was a protest, and he was a martyr.

No, he was an idiot. There is nothing smart, romantic or heroic about deliberately smoking pot in front of a police officer, and it changes nothing because hardly anyone cares that it happened. The reason hardly anyone cares is because, even if they're in favour of legalising pot, smoking it in front of a cop is fucking stupid.

The only thing that guy changed is that he's now in jail and he wasn't before. When it comes to martyrdom, I don't thing he's going to be challenging the Scholl's and the White Rose group any time soon.

[comicartfan]

Rogue Spirit, Charles Rb, and Evryone else who reads this forum, I do apologize for the vulgar language in my last post, I was out of line. You both made decent attempts to have a civil conversation , but I was too insensed at the other poster to even type or think clearly. I can't fathom anyone stealing anything like comics and then trying to justify it and make others that disagree with them look like complete goons. Again, Especially to you Rogue Spirit, I didn't mean to offend, so I will leave this forum and regain my calm. peace.

[Rosie]

Alternatively, you could just go without them.

I'm depressed enough as it is. I hate this "You don't NEED it" type of attitudes. We as a race are pretty damn miserable and definitely need any bit of happiness we can get.

Downloading comics that aren't in print anymore and you can only get via Ebay? That's a good reason to download and tricky for opponents to argue against. Downloading comics to see what they're like before buying them, or not buying them if they turn out to be naff? Easier to argue against, but a good reason. Downloading comics that aren't available to buy where you live? A good reason.

Most of the comics I download are like that. And as I said, the ones I *can* buy, Marvel & Co. are getting money from the figures I buy now instead. Money doesn't just disappear when you don't use it.

Downloading comics because you can't be bothered to pay for them? That's not a good reason. I wouldn't exactly call it stealing, because no physical copy of the comic has been taken, but it's just a crappy thing to do.

Well, that's you're opinion. I don't believe it's terribly wrong, nor do most people in this thread.

This is a flawed assumption on several levels.

a) Most of the money you get from buying the toys goes to the toy company.

And a heck of a lot goes on licensing.

b) The comic doesn't make money from you buying the toys. If everyone buys Green Lantern toys but don't buy Green Lantern comics, the toys are profitable but the comic isn't. So it gets cancelled.

But I'm not affecting everyone as a whole. THat is most certainly a flawed assumption. "If everyone" is irrelevant since it never happens.

I honestly can't think of a comic that got cancelled because of downloading. And if there was one, I'd most certainly buy a few volumes of it to support the author if I liked it.

c) The writers and artists only get paid if the comic sticks around. The comic becomes unprofitable, they aren't getting paid to work on it anymore.

See above.

Also, action figures generally cost more than comics. Maybe if you stopped buying them, you could buy more comics. I mean, duh.

Or maybe I'll do as I please for now, since I'm not really harming anyone.

None of which helps keep the comics going, and most of which profits Toy Biz rather than the publishing section of Marvel. You buy Spider-Man toys, it helps keep Spider-Man's toyline going but it doesn't help Friendly Neighbourhood Spider-Man.

But it still profits them too.

I only have so much money, which is the ultimate flaw in your argument. If I can't pay, they don't get my money either way.
If I was earning money and not poor and at college, then sure, I'd pick up comics. Right now I can't afford it, I'm also depressed to the extent I can't leave my room somedays.

But of course, that's just an excuse. Which is of course, much worse than say, completely ignoring the statistics of your opposition in an argument.

None of which contradicts his point that you have no problem breaking the law.

Black and white terms.

Well, yes, because if people download their new comics but don't ever buy them (as opposed to downloading, saying "ooh, neat", and buying it later), that comic makes less money, and if a comic makes less money it gets cancelled and they're out of a job. Yes, creators are likely to be biased.

That's *not* going to happen. Since your argument is based on a huger "what if" than any Marvel comic of the same name has gotten into, it ultimately fails.

On the other hand, people who actually write comics would rather someone got to read their creation, and then gave them money for it so they could keep on creating. Very few people are going to create full-time if they can't pay the mortgage, buy food and all that good stuff. And if they can't create full time? They lose out and so do we.

This doesn't happen. You have to use things that actually happen as examples if you want a solid argument. Downloading doesn't appear to be hurting the business, and I'm only going to download for as long as I'm poor and can't afford comics.

Not to mention - I borrowed most of my comics from other people before, anyway. Honestly, we pay 5 euros for a single 15 minute comic over here. Does that sound like value?

Except if not enough people buy the comic in sufficient numbers to keep it going, they don't get paid. And if they're independent creators or self-publishers, that's a serious issue; self-publishers and small companies end up in debt if they don't make enough money, never mind making enough to live a decent life.

If it's comics that are no longer in print, I doubt they'll be displeased with the fact people are still reading it and raving about it, and it could lead to someone re-publishing it in the future. But with recent stuff?


I've already dealth with this and you keep making the same point over and over. Next.

How? If your creation isn't getting good enough sales figures, who's going to want to merchandise it? And if you're doing work-for-hire, you get no money from merchandise.

See above.

Piracy can truly harm whether or not a creator gets paid if too many people are downloading and not actually buying an indie or small-press title.

I don't download "Indie and small press" titles, nor can I really find them, but I'd buy them if I could to support them.

No, he was an idiot. There is nothing smart, romantic or heroic about deliberately smoking pot in front of a police officer, and it changes nothing because hardly anyone cares that it happened. The reason hardly anyone cares is because, even if they're in favour of legalising pot, smoking it in front of a cop is fucking stupid.

The only thing that guy changed is that he's now in jail and he wasn't before. When it comes to martyrdom, I don't thing he's going to be challenging the Scholl's and the White Rose group any time soon.

But, as I said, at least he had a backbone. Which I doubt very much you have either.

And comicartfan why are you only apologising to people who are on your side? Are they the only ones that matter to you as human beings?

[Charles RB]

I hate this "You don't NEED it" type of attitudes.

Tough shit, because you don't need it.

And as I said, the ones I *can* buy, Marvel & Co. are getting money from the figures I buy now instead.

And as I say, it doesn't work like that. You are not supporting Marvel's comics by buying the toys based on them, because the toy sales aren't what keeps the comic around.

But I'm not affecting everyone as a whole.

It's called an example.

I honestly can't think of a comic that got cancelled because of downloading.

I can think of many, many comics that got cancelled because people weren't buying it. You've already stated you download comics you could easily buy because you'd rather not pay for them.


Or maybe I'll do as I please for now, since I'm not really harming anyone.

Fine. Then don't say "oh, I can't afford to buy comics!", because you can. Don't buy an action figure, you can afford some comics. This is basic budgeting.

But it still profits them too.

Doesn't matter. It's not helping the comic one iota. The creator's are being employed and paid because of the comic. If the comic doesn't make money, they don't get paid. Toy sales make the company money, but they aren't causing the comic to make money.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

I only have so much money, which is the ultimate flaw in your argument.

No it's not. You budget. You buy one thing instead of another thing. The ultimate flaw in your argument is the assumption that you should be able to have everything you want (entertainment-wise) without paying for it.

If I was earning money and not poor and at college, then sure, I'd pick up comics. Right now I can't afford it

If you weren't collecting action figures, you could afford it. It is really hard to give a shit about you not being able to afford comics when your first post says you've moved into collecting action figures instead.

And I'm at University, so the "at College" excuse doesn't wash. If you're at College, you should know how to budget yourself.


That's *not* going to happen.

Comics are never going to get cancelled if they don't make money? Da fug? Comics get cancelled because they're not making money all the time.

This doesn't happen. You have to use things that actually happen as examples if you want a solid argument.

I really can't believe you are saying, to my face and in all seriousness, that comic creators never have to worry about it not being financially viable for them to create comics full time.

We are talking about the same industry, right? The one where comics are constantly cancelled for low sales and many indie creators have to hold day jobs? Coz that's the industry I'm talking about.

Downloading doesn't appear to be hurting the business

Comics not being bought hurts the industry, especially for smaller companies and self-publishers. They need to make money to stay in existence. You have stated that not buying comics won't hurt anybody. This is demonstratably false when you see the sort of numbers small companies have to work with.

I'm only going to download for as long as I'm poor and can't afford comics.

You can afford them. You're buying action figures instead though. That's not the same thing.

I've already dealth with this and you keep making the same point over and over.

My arse, you have. Not only have you not 'dealt' with it, you're showing a disturbing lack of knowledge about the whole "if comics don't make money, they get cancelled" thing.


See above.

Again- you haven't dealt with it. You sidestepped the issue. You still haven't figured that buying the toys does not keep the actual comics going. I can go out and buy a Manhunter toy right now, but that doesn't help the Manhunter comic.

I don't download "Indie and small press" titles,

And you think nobody does?

nor can I really find them

How can you not find them? It's really easy. You can buy them off Amazon, or ask a local comic shop to order in a copy for you, or buy them off of the company's website half the time.


But, as I said, at least he had a backbone.

So what? He didn't have a brain and he achieved a grand total of fuck-all. He's the worst candidate for martyrdom since Davros.

Which I doubt very much you have either.

Oh really? And what irrefutible evidence did you base that on, pray tell?

[Rosie]

I can think of many, many comics that got cancelled because people weren't buying it. You've already stated you download comics you could easily buy because you'd rather not pay for them.


That's not the same thing. Can you name any comics that got cancelled because everyone was downloading them?

No.

Most people don't enjoy reading on a computer screen, regardless.

Before, I borrowed most of my comics, and bought some. Now I download most, and buy some. What's the different here, exactly?


Fine. Then don't say "oh, I can't afford to buy comics!", because you can. Don't buy an action figure, you can afford some comics. This is basic budgeting.

Actually, I can't afford to buy a reasonable amount of comics. I only buy a figure every so often, and they're 10 euros a pop. A graphic novel here can be anything
up to 25 euros, and a single comic 5 euros each.

I really can't. I had some money saved up and I really, really wanted to put together a Marvel Legends collection.

Going by your logic, if I hadn't, then Toybiz wouldn't have gotten their money either, because I wasn't buying their product.
It doesn't matter whether I own it or not - it's only how the company profits as a whole.

So I can't afford both comics and figures - so I chose to get the figures I wanted for now. When I get money again- I will buy comics.

But for now i really don't need supposedly righteous men like you guilt tripping me.

Doesn't matter. It's not helping the comic one iota. The creator's are being employed and paid because of the comic. If the comic doesn't make money, they don't get paid. Toy sales make the company money, but they aren't causing the comic to make money.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

The creators get money, actually. If you created that character, you're going to be making money off the sales of a figure of that character.

As for currently running comics not written by creators(which is probably most of Marvel), as I said, I'm just one person. Either way, I would have ceased purchase of comics as I felt it was no longer worth it and I could not afford buying enough of them to the degree that they would entertain me.


No it's not. You budget. You buy one thing instead of another thing. The ultimate flaw in your argument is the assumption that you should be able to have everything you want (entertainment-wise) without paying for it.

What's interesting is that there's almost no substance in your argument whatsover other than "It's the law", "you shouldn't have what you didn't pay for."
As has been pointed out, if you've ever recorded anything off television or radio, ever photocopied anything, ever you're just as guilty as me. The difference is,
I don't try to guilt people for not following my beliefs.

Going back to my point earlier - you're still missing the point. If I don't spend money on one companies products, another will get it, regardless.

Nobody is getting any less money. And quite frankly, I believe that most comic writers/artists, and especially the companies, are considerably more well off
than a poor student with nothing to do, when we're talking about the big boys like Marvel, who would be most of what I Download.

If it's a small comic that has a real chance of being cancelled(the only "small" comics I've read are closed Arcs, OOI), then I may buy it, depending on whether
it's any good or not. But this is *Not* the scenario we're talking about here. We're talking about one person buying a comic that the writers get a precentage of,
or not. Either way, they're not getting my money, because I don't have enough to give them. But nonetheless, piracy will never be something that puts
these writers in danger, unless the price of comics goes up even more.

Your entire argument is based on a false presumption.

If I believed I was truly hurting the person writing it, I wouldn't do it. It's just because I think that the few that do freeload(and it's not as if I never buy
comics, either, I do prefer to have them in paper-back and downloading isn't a great substitute) aren't significant enough to harm the writers.

The Majority of people here only download to check out. I'm only downloading until I have money again in a year or two, as i like to have an actual physical comic -
so how are we causing a major dent went the "Download to preview then buy" is waying this out?

You say otherwise. You have nothing to back up the claim, whereas we do indeed have statistics to suggest downloading is not putting a dent in comic book sales.

So please, don't try to guilt me, or judge me. Your tactics are appalling because you write me off as a bad guy purely because A) I break a minor law(Which, as I pointed
out, you have probably also done), or B) "They say you're bad". Please start to show some respect for the way other people do things.


If you weren't collecting action figures, you could afford it. It is really hard to give a shit about you not being able to afford comics when your first post says you've moved into collecting action figures instead.

Explained earlier. Either way, I would have quit comics. I found I could actually, on occasion, afford an action figure, for the price of two small comics, which picked up purely on occasion, isn't very entertaining. And as I said, I would have
stopped buying comics either way. If I hadn't found action figures, I would probably have spent it on something else that the companies would have gotten no profit whatsoever on. So quit whining.

And I'm at University, so the "at College" excuse doesn't wash. If you're at College, you should know how to budget yourself.

I only get enough money for good in a week, plus a little extra. I really can't afford to buy a comic a week, which is the least I'd need to to keep up with the titles I want to read.

Comics are never going to get cancelled if they don't make money? Da fug? Comics get cancelled because they're not making money all the time.

But not because of downloading. I was not going to buy in the comics in the first place.


I really can't believe you are saying, to my face and in all seriousness, that comic creators never have to worry about it not being financially viable for them to create comics full time.

We are talking about the same industry, right? The one where comics are constantly cancelled for low sales and many indie creators have to hold day jobs? Coz that's the industry I'm talking about.


Because of downloading? And what makes you think people would be downloading these indie comics, to begin with? You are presuming we're all completely heartless, the scourage of the industry. Until
you stop, your argument is just a whole dump of stupid.

Comics not being bought hurts the industry, especially for smaller companies and self-publishers. They need to make money to stay in existence. You have stated that not buying comics won't hurt anybody. This is demonstratably false when you see the sort of numbers small companies have to work with.

I'm not buying them either way, as I can't afford to keep up, so I chose to stop buying them until I have money. Gods, why should I even care what you think? You're obviously just saying this to make *You* feel better for the way you do things.

You can afford them. You're buying action figures instead though. That's not the same thing.

No, I can't. I can hardly afford action figures, and yes, they do work out cheaper. Just because I stop collecting comics because of price doesn't mean I can't find something cheaper to pass the time with.

How can you not find them? It's really easy. You can buy them off Amazon, or ask a local comic shop to order in a copy for you, or buy them off of the company's website half the time.


I Don't have a credit card, and we can't use Paypal in Ireland without one.

But - out of interest, I AM looking for a new comic because I believe in helping the writer out, and can't find it, but when I do and have the money, I will buy it.


So what? He didn't have a brain and he achieved a grand total of fuck-all. He's the worst candidate for martyrdom since Davros.

Results don't matter. THe point is he believed he was doing something for the grand good of things, and went ahead and did it

Oh really? And what irrefutible evidence did you base that on, pray tell?

You enjoy preying on "Morally inferior" people like me and telling us how wrong you are. Why are you doing this? The only logical explanation is that you lack confort and strength in your own actions and need to guilt other people to counter that. And don't tell me there isn't at least a *little* of this going on, and you've been pretty damn quick to imply that all these arguments, and apparently imaginary statistics are just attempts to hide our guilt.

I don't feel guilty about what I do. I would rather if I didn't have to, at least not for titles I can actually find, but as nobody's loosing any money, I don't see the problem.

[comicartfan]

And comicartfan why are you only apologising to people who are on your side? Are they the only ones that matter to you as human beings?
Nope, and as hard as it may be for you to believe I do have compassion and love for all living things. I admit, I did fly off the handle after your repeated insults, which is totally uncalled for, and if I'm banned, then I accept responsibility for my actions. But I won't apologize to you. As CharlesRB said, Comics are cancelled all the time because they aren't profitable, and that has NOTHING to do with sales of action figures or other comic related merchandise. We may have the same opinions on alot of things. I don't trust the government (Yours or Ours)with making laws, most of them ARE insane and only serve to futher the interests of those in power, yet I (and You) have to abide by them or risk the penalties. If you don't like the way that laws work, then actively protest, fight them, talk with your legislators and get something done. Look at what has recently happened to William Messner-Loebs. The man NEEDED work because he had fallen on hard times.What if eberyone thought the way that you did? Then the money that would have been earned by comic sales and comics only would have been denied him and the care that he needed. Now you can try to justify your theft in any way you want, but you would feel pretty bad if the man died because he couldn't afford the proper medical attention, or food, or housing? Good job.

[Rosie]

What if eberyone thought the way that you did?

And that's where your argument doesn't hold, most people don't. A lot of people can't even read a comic on a screen That, and as I said, they weren't getting money either way. But you have very selective reading skills.

[Charles RB]

That's not the same thing. Can you name any comics that got cancelled because everyone was downloading them?

Methinks you're missing the point. And that point is- again! -that you say it harms nobody to not pay for the comics you read, when it fact it does because many comics are in ever-present danger of becoming unprofitable and getting cancelled.

I really can't. I had some money saved up and I really, really wanted to put together a Marvel Legends collection.

So, you "really can't"... yet you had some money saved up. That you wanted to spend on something else, and did. How is this an argument in favour of you downloading?

But for now i really don't need supposedly righteous men like you guilt tripping me.

And nobody needs whiners like you going "oh whoa is me, I can't buy everything I want" and that old favourite, "STOP JUDGING MEEEEEEE!!!!", but you're posting anyway.

The creators get money, actually. If you created that character, you're going to be making money off the sales of a figure of that character.

Which doesn't apply to most Marvel and DC comic creators. Which is common knowledge.

What's interesting is that there's almost no substance in your argument whatsover other than "It's the law", "you shouldn't have what you didn't pay for."

Well, y'know, except for that whole "comics need their readers to pay for them or they get cancelled and the creators lose out". Which I've repeatedly said and you've repeatedly gone "la la la I can't hear you!" over. While the only substance you're giving is "well, damn it, I WANT to read them! Stop judging me, you evil moral-holding people!" and so on, so forth, ad nauseum.

As has been pointed out, if you've ever recorded anything off television or radio, ever photocopied anything, ever you're just as guilty as me.

Oh yes, the horrible evil that is setting the VCR to record a show so you don't miss it. I don't know quite how doing that harm