Of course it's nice to think that customers want you to create more, but for instance I saw a movie today because I wanted the experience of seeing it and I was curious about it. Not because I particularly care if they make a sequel! I imagine most people buying games feel the same way: they just want the game.
So, what you're saying is, you were interested in what they had already done, and payed them money to see it, even though that money won't go to making the thing you were interested in better at all...
Tell me the truth. If it was free to you, you would have seen it anyway, right? You essentially only payed because you had to? Because they were placing an artificial scarcity on their works and holding it hostage, ransoming it to whomever pays the fee.
Look, I'm no anti-copyright zealot, I just see things how they really are, and it's pretty disgusting in most cases. Look around you. Everything you have is a result of the flow of ideas and information. Every time the limitation of communication occurs, it's only due to malevolence or greed.
There is a different path, a virtuous one. One in which you get paid to do the work, as you do the work. For instance, I help fund Pioneer One
because I was interested in it, and now you can watch those episodes for free, just fire up your torrent software, the work's been done and paid for, the distribution is free. They work on the new content, because that's how they get paid.
Did you know that there are no copyright or design patents in the Fashion and Automotive industries
? Oh, the horror! Who will want to Innovate?! Wait... those are two of the most innovative and monetarily successful fields... their restrictions have been lifted, they are free to create.
The artificial scarcity system is already seeing stress (why? it's unnatural), and it's only enforceable now because of laws created by folks who have failed to understand nature and culture at its most fundamental levels. Who knows how long people will accept the censorship and artificial limitations? I'm not waiting to find out. Onward!
Sure, use the current system to bootstrap yourself into the new system, you sort of have to right now, because there's just no way to get funding from interested parties ahead of time... or is there
? Ah, that's just one of many fledgling services, but squint and turn your head sideways when you look at the big picture and you can sort of see what future trends will bring.
Both methods will be around for a while yet, so if you're still buying and selling artificially scarce goods, then there's nothing wrong with that. You're a product of your environment, I understand, it's fine... "It's not your fault, but is is your problem."
So, don't get miffed when "pirates" (read: futurists) remove your bogus artificial restrictions and you're out money because you didn't get paid up front for the work.
A builder gets paid after the work is done, but they had a contract to build and know they'll be paid for the work they do. Artists and Developers at big studios work under the same basic rules. Where'd the artificial scarcity come from? Publishers. Why is it when you remove these middle men, you adopt their methods instead of sticking to what works for everyone already? In the age of instant information we don't need their artificial scarcity systems anymore.
I may have been a bit zealous in my prior post but it's just to make a point -- to spread that idea freely... My real point is that we should realize that this is the dawning of a new age, and anything that fails to adapt to change becomes extinct.
I don't think this is off topic, these concepts are severely tangential to the design of a DRM system... especially a polite one.
The most polite DRM is the one that doesn't exist (or even need to). The most effective DRM system is one in which you just keep your ideas in your head and don't let anyone else experience them. You can find some middle ground, but that whole area is disgusting quicksand to me.