Dan Slott: Don't Download My Comics!

[Darthphere]

Disagree.

Just because someone is a hypocrite doesn't make what they actually preach wrong.


Its a horribly political type of debating to ignore what the person says in favour slighting the person.


Actually one could argue those who have done wrong in the first place are actually in the best position to give advice (thinking of drug users here...)

Its not a matter of ignoring what he says, its a matter of what he's saying is cheapened. Again, I have no stand if I start going around telling people on here to stop insulting each other and then go and call you stupid. Nobody is going to take me seriously. What Dan is saying is great and all, I agree, especially with buying low selling books like She-Hulk, but his stance is cheapened by his actions and you're going to get a lot of people saying "Why should i listen to Dan?" Its just the way the world works. I dont care what Dan downloads, but he's going to get called on his actions for speaking out.

 

[hippy fascist]

Then you wait for the DVD or buy a Tivo.

But a Tivo Doesn't earn the programme maker's money...

 

[Darthphere]

But a Tivo Doesn't earn the programme maker's money...

But its legal, so....

 

[hippy fascist]

But its legal, so....

So was slavery

Dude, weren't you one of the people who said that reed's argument in civil was a crock of ****?

 

[Darthphere]

So was slavery

Dude, weren't you one of the people who said that reed's argument in civil was a crock of ****?

I dont see where putting friends in prison equates to downloading a comic or tv show.

Yeah, and the slavery analogy is in poor taste as well.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I haven't downloaded any comics since I got a full-time job, except one or two that I would've felt dirty for buying, just to see a page or two that had some big thing on them. Before I downloaded stuff all the time simply because I couldn't afford all the comics I wanted to read. Now, however, I'll buy something if I want to try it out because I can spare the extra $3 or $4. The only things I'd download at this point are, as others have pointed out, things that are impossible to find and/or reasonably afford, like Miracleman or entire runs of comic series. But if Marvel keeps putting out those giant collections, I may even stop downloading those.

 

[Darthphere]

I haven't downloaded any comics since I got a full-time job, except one or two that I would've felt dirty for buying, just to see a page or two that had some big thing on them. Before I downloaded stuff all the time simply because I couldn't afford all the comics I wanted to read. Now, however, I'll buy something if I want to try it out because I can spare the extra $3 or $4. The only things I'd download at this point are, as others have pointed out, things that are impossible to find and/or reasonably afford, like Miracleman or entire runs of comic series. But if Marvel keeps putting out those giant collections, I may even stop downloading those.

Corp is on the ball this morning.

Ok kids, downloading is bad. Buying comics good. Can we agree on that?

no.

 

[iloveclones]

No that person is uninjured in this particular example.

The argument against d/l is that you are not buying and therefore the person who owns the rights is losing a sale and the money.

If the dvd is unavailable to buy in your country and you d/l the owner is not losing the money because they never offered it for sale to you in the first place.

That's not entirely true, because you don't know the circumstances behind why they're not offering it.

Maybe they have a contract with some podunk station somewhere that gives them exclusive rights. And when it becomes widely available as a download, who's to say they can't null the contract. (I wish DBM still came around. He could comment on these things better than I can.)

Or maybe they aren't releasing it because they feel that it would build up demand for it. Disney did this for a long time, not releasing some of their movies, so people would be going nuts for it.

Or maybe he's just some crazy fundamentalist who bought the rights because he finds the show offensive and doesn't want it inflicted upon the world anymore(*cough* Bosom Buddies *cough*). It's always been rumored that Sylvester Stallone bought up all the existing copies of some low-rent porn that he did before hitting it big with Rocky (that could be completely Urban Legend, I don't even remember where I heard it.)

The point is, it is their's to do with as they wish.

 

[PhotoJones]

I think its simple logic that if you partake in an activity, you shouldn't speak out on not doing that activity.

For example, if I came on here and told everyone to stop insulting each other, what would you say? "Look who's talking".

Downloading comics as a whole, really doesn't affect the industry. It effects retailers, and thats why I don't download comics I like, I buy them.

if you came on here and told people to stop insulting each other, you're right, i would say say "look who's talking." but that doesn't change the fact that insulting people isn't cool.

and when you say that downloading comics ONLY effects the retailer, that's just plain wrong. that's being either very niave or very ignorant. maybe it's being both.

either way, you should just stop. in this instance, you don't really have a strong argument.

 

[Darthphere]

if you came on here and told people to stop insulting each other, you're right, i would say say "look who's talking." but that doesn't change the fact that insulting people isn't cool.

and when you say that downloading comics ONLY effects the retailer, that's just plain wrong. that's being either very niave or very ignorant. maybe it's being both.

either way, you should just stop. in this instance, you don't really have a strong argument.

All I have to do is link you to monthly sales. Comics as a whole are on a rise. Theyre making more money every month. Comic monthly sales are up, TPB and Hardcover sales are up, despite the whole downloading comics business.

And yes, if I download Miracleman off a torrent, thats effecting solely retailers who have that book for sale, otherwise, any and all money on that comic has been made already, since there aren't any collections of the like. By the way, I never said it ONLY affected retailers, I said it really doesn't hurt the industry, there is a difference, as in it does effect the industry, but its in such a small way that its hardly noticeable.

If I don't have a strong argument, than I dont know what to call yours. Sorry if I don't agree with your stance that any and all comic book downloading is evil, because IMO, its not. I don't agree with it on most cases, but there are always exceptions.

 

[Darthphere]

You know, today is one of those days that I woke up, and just started hating people. So emo:

Yeah i realise this is mildly off the topic, but as opposed to the "good stuff i'll pick this up blather" i thought i'd share my new Initiative.

My new stance on anything Dan Slott writes is to "cast my vote" on Demonoid and download his work, hopefully the day prior to release.

I like his stuff really I do. But if he's cool with violating IP on tv shows and such, all the while crying I vote with my dollars- then I'll vote with downloads. His IP is just as ripe for violation, as is any other creator who's taking from hollywood/movies/music/etc. and if anyone knows of other comics folk who are torrenting out of both sides of their mouth- let me know- i'll add them to the list.

i mean- Dan- its not like the guy who played street hawk, its producers, et al has needed to eat this decade right?

Now all i need to do is get an account on demonoid and i'll be all set- Dan- can you invite me?

Feel free to go over to newsarama and call this guy stupid.

I'm done with this topic, I don't care enough to have devoted this much time to it. PJ, feel free to PM me if you wish to continue this discourse.

 

[Oh Snap!]

Definetly a good move for Dan to stand up against downloading comics, earns alot of respect for doing that in my books. But the fact he's telling people not to download his work when he's downloaded over 10 gigs of other peoples kinda shoots his whole point in the foot.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I don't think it's quite the same thing. There's a difference between downloading issues of She-Hulk and The Thing, which are very recent and easily available in back issue or trade format, and downloading TV shows that have been off the air for years and have no DVD collections available.

 

[hippy fascist]

I'll be interested to see if he posts in this thread since he has come back a few times recently

 

[Oh Snap!]

I don't think it's quite the same thing. There's a difference between downloading issues of She-Hulk and The Thing, which are very recent and easily available in back issue or trade format, and downloading TV shows that have been off the air for years and have no DVD collections available.

I definetly agree with you there, it's all about availability.

But it doesn't help his point much, people can still say that it takes time to make the DVD's and for the actors to learn their scripts, the writers to write the scripts, the stagehands and designers to design everything etc. and it all probably could be bought on ebay.

But yes the point still stands, I don't download anything unless I intend to buy it and can't wait, or unless it's very old and hard to find.

 

[Gonking]

lol I download every comic I read.

 

[gildea]

double post

 

[gildea]

That's not entirely true, because you don't know the circumstances behind why they're not offering it.

Shouldn't matter they're still not being injured by not getting a sale they don't want to make.

Maybe they have a contract with some podunk station somewhere that gives them exclusive rights. And when it becomes widely available as a download, who's to say they can't null the contract. (I wish DBM still came around. He could comment on these things better than I can.)

It's highly unlikely that anyone can be held accountable in the manner you're suggesting for their own intellectual property rights being vilolated. If anyone is idiotic enough to include a clause that does what you are suggesting, my sympathies are limited. As the illegal copy is more than likely taking from the stations broadcast as well they are actually more culpable.

Or maybe they aren't releasing it because they feel that it would build up demand for it. Disney did this for a long time, not releasing some of their movies, so people would be going nuts for it.

Again only a problem if the downloader doesn't buy it on it's eventual release.

Or maybe he's just some crazy fundamentalist who bought the rights because he finds the show offensive and doesn't want it inflicted upon the world anymore(*cough* Bosom Buddies *cough*). It's always been rumored that Sylvester Stallone bought up all the existing copies of some low-rent porn that he did before hitting it big with Rocky (that could be completely Urban Legend, I don't even remember where I heard it.)

I can at least understand that. How many shows that aren't available in the US is that the case for that people have a moral objection to it?

The point is, it is their's to do with as they wish.

Not disputing the persons rights only percieved injury.
Though as you have proved above with sly stallone it may be possible to find some form of inury the actual examples are extremely rare and unlikely. Therefore I still feel I'm on reasonable ground when I say there is no actual injury when you download something that isn't actually on sale.

The only exceptions being heightened circumstances of which the only actual example provided is possibly an urban legend.

 

[hippy fascist]

Paris Hilton made a career out of a stolen movie

 

[iloveclones]

Shouldn't matter they're still not being injured by not getting a sale they don't want to make.



It's highly unlikely that anyone can be held accountable in the manner you're suggesting for their own intellectual property rights being vilolated. If anyone is idiotic enough to include a clause that does what you are suggesting, my sympathies are limited. As the illegal copy is more than likely taking from the stations broadcast as well they are actually more culpable.



Again only a problem if the downloader doesn't buy it on it's eventual release.



I can at least understand that. How many shows that aren't available in the US is that the case for that people have a moral objection to it?



Not disputing the persons rights only percieved injury.
Though as you have proved above with sly stallone it may be possible to find some form of inury the actual examples are extremely rare and unlikely. Therefore I still feel I'm on reasonable ground when I say there is no actual injury when you download something that isn't actually on sale.

The only exceptions being heightened circumstances of which the only actual example provided is possibly an urban legend.

I remember reading a letter to the editor asking why some show he liked wasn't broadcast locally anywhere, and the answer was pretty much as I said it. I have no idea how common a practice like that is.

For the most part, I'm playing Devil's Advocate here. Because I believe, on balance, downloading is helping more than hurting right now. And I believe that's because the product isn't really what you want. Whereas an mp3 sounds the same (for the most part) as a CD.

 

[gildea]

I remember reading a letter to the editor asking why some show he liked wasn't broadcast locally anywhere, and the answer was pretty much as I said it. I have no idea how common a practice like that is.

I seriously doubt that they thought they were avoiding illegal distribution of the show by not broadcasting locally. What it sounds like was that the national networks (not having read the letter would I be correct in assuming it was broadcast nationally) had an exclusive deal which is a different kettle of fish from trying to avoid piracy, it's only maintaining an audience.