View Single Post
Old 30th May 2009 | Show parent
Registered User
Originally Posted by colinmiller ➡️
Soul hit the nail on the head of the problem.

People think that because it's software and not physical that it doesn't deserve the same rights as something physical. And that even though the same amount of costs are involved to produce both products, the software product should not get the same revenue simply because it has no mass.

Let's look at some fake numbers for example.

You have a keyboard company and a software company. They both make a product that costs them $1000 in development (just a low number for simplicity). The cost of each is $100

A studio has 2 rooms and needs to build 10 rooms. The keyboard company then gets $1000 and the software company gets $100 and the studio just copies the same software in each room. Both have one through the same effort. But they keyboard company gets to pay off it's development and manufacturing costs, and the software company is still $900 in the hole. Is this fair?
Just to get some more on the subject out there for discussion.
The sooner software companies stop making the stupid hardware comparison the better off they'll be, and only music creation software companies make it AFAIK.

I can't help but notice that you failed to mention the development costs of the keyboard, which are most likely way higher than the software. It also takes more employees and actual factories to make the keyboard. It also can't exist in more than one place at one time.
With hardware (even computer hardware) you can take it anywhere you want. You can lend it, rent it, and sell it.
The problem is that software companies want to pick and choose when it wants "hardware" and software rights. Take Cakewalk for example. Their EULA requires very hardware like rights (only one computer install at a time), but it says you can't sell or transfer it. How many pieces of hardware can you not sell, rent or transfer? Companies make hardware every day that doesn't ever get close to making money and they have to make thousands of actual units and ship them to stores. Software companies don't have these issues.
Then, also like Cakewalk, you have the developer saying that although the EULA says that, you can really install it on more than one computer you own as long as you only use one copy at a time. If the developer picks and chooses what rules to enforce, are there really any rules?
What if music had those rules? Do you copy CDs over to other CDs? Transfer to hard drive or player? Are they on your iPod, computer, and on a disc that you aren't even sure where it is anymore?
The software companies are just like us. They have a version of the story and it is the one that they feel is in their best interest (and rightly so), but it doesn't make it the truth.