- From: <piranna@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:00:52 +0200
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAKfGGh1SeYpELGJXccnzWpjrKEbA152kkxHaTQRyrZ2OMSH+vA@mail.gmail.com>
> > So, also then, the cost of the goods was overpriced, isn't it? > > By cost of production I mean the cost of, for example, pressing an LP. I don't mean the value that the content creator assigned to the content itself. > I agree, I was talking about the cost of create a phisical copy was low, but now with digital copies it's null in practical terms, so all the remaining cost are trully overprized, specially when trying to sell digital content at an equiparable cost of a phisical copy. It doesn't make sense, you have lost the money for create the content both for pshisical or digital content, don't matter how much copies do you sold, one or one million. Your only option is to compensate the costs for the manufacture of each copy, and for digital copies this has lowered a lot, and you should raise it lower or give an added value if you want to compete with your cheapest competitor, in this case piracy copies. You work for Apple, you should know that the winner movement of the iTunes Store where the low prizes, the nice interface and the seamless integratiin with iTunes player... :-) > If it's over-priced, then don't buy it. If it's sold in a form you don't like, don't buy it. That's a free market. > It's not a free market since the product I'm interested to buy is not in the conditions I need, there are no other distributors and more important there are no other alternatives. The fact that you can buy a disk from other artist don't have anything to do with the fact that you want to listen to one particular artist, and this kind of uni-directional statements and mandates about when, how and about what amount are this products distributed based and creating an artificial scarcity is not a valid example of free market, but instead of a monopoly.
Received on Monday, 19 August 2013 18:01:24 UTC