I'm not sure about that, they would get a less expensive deal and they may then buy their own sub (advertising). Books has been this way for so long. But yes they may be a loss of money for them in the short term. That is why they are try to push everything digital, more money for them.
When Shannon was selling his content with cd-rom, were we allowed to lend our CD to our friend after benefiting from them?
I'd imagine the same principles applied then - the copy right script was the same then as now. Anyway, I'm sure he'll be chiming in soon...
The copy protection is not that old, I think the first time it was introduce was with AM5 or AM2011.
(07-08-2014, 08:04 AM)MannSchaft Wrote: [ -> ]Guys
I need a clear answer please
I downloaded AM (I think it was 5) maybe 10 months ago but because the downloading was very slow I stopped and removed it. I think the download didn't even reach 40%. I didn't use it (maybe I just opened the folder, I don't remember) and I checked my computer and the external drives and no AM there.
So now, do I have to pay for it?
I know Shannon won't answer but maybe Benjamin?
No you won't, you're fine. The script can't kick-in if you didn't listen to it. You deleted it, you did the right thing. You're free to carry on using subs....
Yeah you should be okay as you deleted it and didn't listen to it.
-Ben
(07-08-2014, 08:04 AM)MannSchaft Wrote: [ -> ]Guys
I need a clear answer please
I downloaded AM (I think it was 5) maybe 10 months ago but because the downloading was very slow I stopped and removed it. I think the download didn't even reach 40%. I didn't use it (maybe I just opened the folder, I don't remember) and I checked my computer and the external drives and no AM there.
So now, do I have to pay for it?
I know Shannon won't answer but maybe Benjamin?
You are safe if it's either
A) You download it but didn't listen to it, and
B) You listen to it in a period of time but didn't get the benefits
I would like to point out to you all a few things.
First, what trigger antipiracy code? Piracy.
What is piracy? I don't know a better definition of it than to say that there is an unequal exchange of value between producer and consumer in a digital medium.
In a store, you walk in take an apple, and if you don't pay for it, you have committed theft. Why? because you have benefitted but the producer or production chain has not. Without that equal exchange of value, one or the other side has no motivation to participate. So why are you going to spend all day picking apples in the sun if you don't get paid? Answer: YOU WON'T.
And if you don't, and nobody else does, who picks the apples? Nobody.
And if nobody picks the apples, how can they be transported to market? They can't.
If they're not transported to market, how can you buy them? You can't.
Without demand, there is no supply. If demand is there, but not pay, then demand does not get fulfilled because there is no motivating factor for the supply chain to act. Nobody tends the apple trees, nobody picks the apples, nobody transports them, nobody waxes the or washes them, or puts them out for sale. And no consumer can buy them.
Now, digital goods have made it effortless for people to make unlimited copies and distribute them. But the rest of the equation remains the same. So you have a product and that product is created to satisfy a market demand. It takes time, money, effort, expertise, research, development, preparation and skill to create. Usually from multiple people working in concert.
If that product does not get paid for, what happens to it? Well if it's not producing sales, it's going to go bye bye. It's taking up space, time, energy, attention, whatever that could be making money for the creation/supply chain. That's why we don't have certain programs available anymore.
If you buy one copy of a program, and ten people benefit, then there is a 9:1 advantage to the consumer and the supplier is now 9x less motivated to make more, or improve on said product. Why? Because the price effectively drops 900% and so does the profit.
I set the price of my programs based on the benefit you get, but also the skill, time, effort, knowledge, research, experimentation, development, frustration, exhaustion, patience and so forth required to create it. One program may require 10 years to research and create, as in the case of BAMM 2.0, or as in the latest version of AM, it has been in development since 2006.
If I spend the time - which is unrecoverable if wasted - and so forth to create a program that works, and I set a price that is too high, then the market won't pay for it and I will fail. If I set a price that is too low, then the profit will not support the cost of the product production, and I will fail. But if I set the price where it needs to be, and the value matches or exceeds the price, then the profits will support the production and I succeed and continue producing more.
When I set the price of a six stage 5G program at $500, I am telling you, this program is very valuable, and I expect you to return to me the value that I am giving to you. Many here would argue, myself included, that the real value of one of my 5G six stage programs actually is more than $500 based on what you get out of them, but kin this case, I expect you to return to me value in an amount of $500.
If you don't, then you are reducing my income by that amount that I would have gotten had you done things according to the rules of commerce and exchange. That means that value is not flowing to me, but remains with you instead. Yet you benefit. The resulting imbalance is known as theft. You are taking away from me, value that I have given to you. The equation is not balanced.
My antipiracy code triggers when you pirate something. If you want to know more, we have been over it a thousand times. There's threads and FAQs. But when you pirate something it triggers.
That means, when there is an unequal exchange of value. When you take from me something you did not pay for.
I am very generous in allowing you to benefit from the program even if it's pirated. I am also very generous in not expecting you to pay for it if you did not benefit. But if you take from me, and do not pay for what you took, the antipiracy code triggers. In the pirater and the piratee.
If you group buy something, it triggers the code. That is always piracy. Group buys always result in multiple people benefiting from the work and "owning" the work without there being an equal exchange of value. Everyone who pitches in wants a copy, and everyone who pitches in expects to get benefit from that one copy that was paid for, while creating numerous un-paid-for copies. That is an unequal exchange of value, and that is theft of value from me in return for full value for you.
I would love it if you guys who pirate things were more willing to try to understand the point of view of the content producer. I would love it if you guys would consider the other side of the coin more. Yes, I do what I do because I love doing it, but I deserve to be able to pay my bills in exchange for my work. If I can't, then why am I doing it? I'm not, because now I have to find another source of revenue to be able to pay my bills with.
Without an equal exchange of value, the system collapses and the supply chain breaks. The more of what I am asking for each copy that you actually pay, the more motivated I am to continue producing more stuff.
The simple solution to all your AP code worries is this. Don't pirate my stuff. Pay for each copy you use. If you don't want to, then use your copy according to the guidelines which will not trigger the AP code. It's not as if I am not being exceedingly generous in how I have set it up! You can use one copy for unlimited listeners if you only have one owner, and one copy being used and controlled by that one owner of that one paid for copy. So a room full of guys could benefit from AM6 if one of them buys a copy and plays it on a stereo in the living room, as long as he is the only owner and he has the only copy. How nice is that? It's not like I am being unreasonable. The unreasonable part comes in when people come to my forum and complain that I won't let them blatantly steal from me because they wanna.
You think this business runs on air? You think my time and experience and knowledge and expertise is worthless? You think I don't need to pay for gas and electric and insurance and dental work and groceries and and and? If you don't like our prices, you're welcome to patronize one of our fine competitors. Yet instead you are here. Why? Because my programs are clearly superior, and we all know it. Nobody else puts in the ridiculous hours I do. Nobody else develops new technology all the time. Nobody else does the things I do that result in my programs being as effective and useful as they are. So nobody else gets the results I do. That makes my works more valuable, and the prices reflect that.
Don't complain if you can't afford it. Save up and pay for it if you want it. Or, go buy something from someone else. But theft is never acceptable, no matter how much self delusion you apply to the equation to frame it as okay or acceptable. Some of you have actually got yourselves believing that I am somehow wrong for expecting you to actually PAY for my products! Egad, what a crazy idea. Just who do I think I am, anyway?
No matter how you frame it, unequal exchange of value is theft, and wrong. If I do not have the money to buy gas for my car, I don't go steal some, because it is WRONG, and I have self respect and morals. I don't put myself ahead of others and use their resources to benefit myself without returning value in kind. I wait until I can afford it, and then I buy it.
If I disagree with the price of gas, I can buy it from somewhere else for less. Or I can use a different type of vehicle that is more fuel efficient. Or I can buy a bicycle and tell the gas company to kiss off. But stealing is not a reasonable option in any case. That does not change when you go from physical goods to digital goods. My hours of training and work are not less valuable than yours. You don't work for free, and neither do I.
Stop trying to get something for nothing, unless that something is given to you for nothing on purpose. I have no problem with you downloading my free products. But the ones that have a price tag on them? You need to pay for them. Not group buy them, not share them, not pirate them. You don't have any right to get upset with me for your having done something illegal. Group buy something and then get upset because you didn't get what you wanted? Too bad. You broke the law, and that's tough cookies for you. The antipiracy code will trigger, and you will have to deal with it, or pay for what you have and deactivate it. Them's the breaks. There's no room for you getting upset because you paid 10% of what you were expected to pay or whatever it was, and then you hit a roadblock. Paid-in-full customers get to benefit fully from my work and enjoy it, not people who steal or cheat the producer. Using and enjoying the fruits of my labors is a privilege, not a right, and you have to pay what I ask for that privilege. No matter what cockamamie story you have convinced yourself of to justify the theft of value from me because you wanted to or because you didn't want to wait to save up for it.
Hmm, while I agree with a lot of what Shannon says, the one thing that bothers me is the "sharing" idea.
If I buy a blu-ray, I can always lend it to someone. Can I watch it while they have it? No, unless I'm over there. What if I buy a subliminal and use it then lend it to a friend? Anti-piracy. Seems a bit lopsided in that particular case.
If I lend a sub to someone without keeping a copy for myself, I believe it should be allowed, just like it would be with a blu-ray.
Sarge I agree with what you say about the blu-ray analogy; however, these products we buy belong to Shannon. This is his life work, he needs to be compensated for his time, work and effort. When it is all said and done, Shannon has a right to put whatever limits he wants in regard to anti-piracy. All he is doing is trying to protect his products which he has put all his time, effort into creating them. No other products, which I have tried myself compare to Shannon's. Not to mention, to how he listens to his customers and improves them the way the customer wants, within the limits of the program.
(07-20-2014, 05:58 PM)spiritman Wrote: [ -> ]Sarge I agree with what you say about the blu-ray analogy; however, these products we buy belong to Shannon. This is his life work, he needs to be compensated for his time, work and effort. When it is all said and done, Shannon has a right to put whatever limits he wants in regard to anti-piracy. All he is doing is trying to protect his products which he has put all his time, effort into creating them. No other products, which I have tried myself compare to Shannon's. Not to mention, to how he listens to his customers and improves them the way the customer wants, within the limits of the program.
I get that, I do. But it would sit better with me if he just owned that a bit more by saying "That's just the way it is, deal with it or move on". When you get into "legal/moral" arguments, you just force us to find ways around it.
If it's a legal concern: make them as sharable as a blu-ray. If it's your own thing, then it is what it is. But by comparing this to legal copyright laws, I have to point out that you are NOT, in actual fact, on par with them.
(07-20-2014, 06:19 PM)SargeMaximus Wrote: [ -> ] (07-20-2014, 05:58 PM)spiritman Wrote: [ -> ]Sarge I agree with what you say about the blu-ray analogy; however, these products we buy belong to Shannon. This is his life work, he needs to be compensated for his time, work and effort. When it is all said and done, Shannon has a right to put whatever limits he wants in regard to anti-piracy. All he is doing is trying to protect his products which he has put all his time, effort into creating them. No other products, which I have tried myself compare to Shannon's. Not to mention, to how he listens to his customers and improves them the way the customer wants, within the limits of the program.
I get that, I do. But it would sit better with me if he just owned that a bit more by saying "That's just the way it is, deal with it or move on". When you get into "legal/moral" arguments, you just force us to find ways around it.
If it's a legal concern: make them as sharable as a blu-ray. If it's your own thing, then it is what it is. But by comparing this to legal copyright laws, I have to point out that you are NOT, in actual fact, on par with them.
Well he is the one who created the product so in some way it is copyright protected. Maybe not in a legal aspect but it is still copyright material that someone created. I think Shannon has made it clear at least to me about where he stands. Basically, if you got his products illegally then the anti-piracy kicks. Which tells you in the future to buy his products instead of illegally downloading them. Which to me, doesn't seem too much to ask for. The products still works even if you get it illegally but it all comes down to morals. It just comes down to if you want a product, buy legally. Now I am guilty of downloading stuff illegally, I did that twice. With the two products, I like those products but in the end I didn't buy them. I bought other products that were similar to the ones I downloaded illegally. But I didn't get those products illegally, they were legit copies.
so does copy protection trigger if: u are listening to a sub on ur phone and a mate ask u what ur listening to and he listens to it for 10 seconds on ur hearphones and then gives it back to u?
u do not copy it nor have any intention of letting him/her benefit from it tho?
please reply
(07-21-2014, 03:23 AM)Hold007 Wrote: [ -> ]so does copy protection trigger if: u are listening to a sub on ur phone and a mate ask u what ur listening to and he listens to it for 10 seconds on ur hearphones and then gives it back to u?
u do not copy it nor have any intention of letting him/her benefit from it tho?
please reply
I think you should be fine.