Forum - View topic

Hey, Answerman! - The Subtitle Will Not Be Televised

Kakugo wrote:

Japanese companies have done a damn fine job of servicing their own market..

Have they? Pirating anime and manga are rampant problems in Japan, too. In an age where many people like reading on their cell phones, manga magazine circulation and tankoban sales have been dropping. Japanese companies do not make their own shows available streaming in Japan, even when they are available legally outside of Japan. Shonen Jump is willing to try digitally distributing their manga in North America, but not in Japan.

If I lived in Japan, I'd be angry about the way Japanese manga and anime companies "value" their fans!

TitanXL wrote:

Kakugo wrote: The US market is the largest one for anime outside of Japan, and Is it? I mean, when I see anime and manga sales do like 10x+ better in countries like France I have to question that statement.

France has the largest manga market after Japan. Third is Korea if I remember correctly. But anime and manga are different. The US might very well be the largest for animes.

But most of all, it's about encouraging legal acquisition as opposed to illegal acquisition despite budget constraints.

Agent355 wrote:

By comparing buying used to piracy, you opened up that slippery slope can-of-worms. You aren't even the first person on this board to do so! You denied it, but then what is this statement: Quote: If nobody involved with the release/creation of the content will reap the benefit of my purchase, I don't see the point to spending money on it. I might as well as pirate it supposed to mean?

What it means is the part that everyone keeps editing out where I explained exactly what I meant by it:

If nobody involved with the release/creation of the content will reap the benefit of my purchase, I don't see the point to spending money on it I might as well as pirate it, which I haven't done for years, because

• I can still access it, just like buying it used
• Nobody who made it sees a penny of my money, just like buying it used
• I spend $0, which is a huge benefit over buying it used.

I'm specifically talking about supporting the people making and releasing content. In that regard, it is just like piracy because (don't ignore the next part when/if you quote this) $0.00 and 0% of money spent on somebody buying a used copy goes to the people creating or releasing the content. Yes, some random person out in the world did support the release/creators at some point and may or may not do so in the future, but I'm not talking about that random person out in the world. I'm talking specifically about the person buying it used. I don't see the relevance of falling back on what some random person did and trying to apply that to someone else who did something different.

I'm not saying buying used is illegal or wrong to do, which piracy is imo. I'm not saying that buying used = piracy. What I am saying is that it doesn't support the people making/releasing the content, and that is an aspect it shares with piracy. Not that everything about both acts are identical, but that one trait is identical.

According to the book, one of the most lucrative revenue streams for U.S. publishers during this period came from churning out unauthorized copies of British books before their rivals could. Authors didn't get a dime, say Burrows and Wallace. But don't feel too bad for the British publishers--they'd done exactly the same to French authors.

From the book:

Quote:

Some (U.S. publishers) sent agents to England with orders to grab volumes from bookstalls... and ship them west by fast packet. Copy was then rushed from the dock to the composing room, presses run night and day, and books hurried to the stores or hawked in the streets like hot corn.

fyi, I would have trimmed you quote down for relevance, but since you seem to be opposed to that, I'll just leave it in full text.

That said, the problem with your statement is that you're more or less saying the effects of buying used and priating are the same and they're not. It's not as simple as saying since person 'a' who bought used spent $0 and person 'b' who pirated spent $0 then the affect on the industry is the same becuase aritst 'y' will reap $0 from both persons 'a' and 'b.' This is why that reasoning is flawed: person 'b' who pirates x amount of anime and manga a day en masse is less likely to go out into the world in spend any money be it used or new goods that will either a) get back to the original creator or b) show the original creator and all those involved that there is demand for their product that could equate to actual dollars. For instance if a person buys a lot of used products in stores, online, etc. then I'm pretty sure those numbers get worked into the general scheme of things to let the the primary seller (i.e. funimation) that said product is high demand but either unavailable to be bought new (out of print) or not at a price point that these people are willing to buy it at. Given that information the provider can make adjustments to how they're releasing the product by making the product more desirable at its current price point or offering lower priced items these people would be willing to buy. Piracy gives none of this data because when someone isn't paying for something it's hard to figure out what they would pay for or even if they would pay for anything. So yeah, buying second hand is not effectively pirating.

kakoishii wrote:

fyi, I would have trimmed you quote down for relevance, but since you seem to be opposed to that, I'll just leave it in full text. That said, the problem with your statement is that you're more or less saying the effects of buying used and priating are the same and they're not. It's not as simple as saying since person 'a' who bought used spent $0 and person 'b' who pirated spent $0 then the affect on the industry is the same becuase aritst 'y' will reap $0 from both persons 'a' and 'b.' This is why that reasoning is flawed: person 'b' who pirates x amount of anime and manga a day en masse is less likely to go out into the world in spend any money be it used or new goods that will either a) get back to the original creator or b) show the original creator and all those involved that there is demand for their product that could equate to actual dollars. For instance if a person buys a lot of used products in stores, online, etc. then I'm pretty sure those numbers get worked into the general scheme of things to let the the primary seller (i.e. funimation) that said product is high demand but either unavailable to be bought new (out of print) or not at a price point that these people are willing to buy it at. Given that information the provider can make adjustments to how they're releasing the product by making the product more desirable at its current price point or offering lower priced items these people would be willing to buy. Piracy gives none of this data because when someone isn't paying for something it's hard to figure out what they would pay for or even if they would pay for anything. So yeah, buying second hand is not effectively pirating.

I feel like you aren't reading what I'm typing because you typed a paragraph saying how used sales aren't equal to piracy, which is something I've agreed with and stated over and over. However, there is one thing that they have in common: when you buy [insert a series] used you have given $0 back to the people who made it or released it. That is something that it shares with piracy. Not that used sales = piracy, but if you listed every possible trait of piracy and every possible trait of used sales, this would be one thing that they have in common. Not everything. Not that they are identical. Not that they are effectively the same in every possible way, but that they have this one singular thing in common. When compared on that one trait, they are the same. Not that they are the same when you compare them in every possible way, but solely on this one specific thing.

The assumption that one day someone will choose to buy something new rather than used. The idea that a person who buys used is more likely to purchase new than someone who pirates. The idea that stores report back all of their used sales on a per title basis to companies who supply them new copies. This is all relevant to an argument that used sales and piracy are equal and have an equal impact on the industry. I've never made this argument though.

My #1 reason for buying anime it to support shows I like and support people releasing shows that I like. Most collectors probably place being able to view it or owning it as their #1, but that's not me. When you remove my #1 reason, then I don't see the point to spending my money on it and I don't. That lack of me spending money and the lack of the creators/releasers getting my money in exchange for a product is what I meant by, "I might as well pirate it." Not that piracy and used sales are identical in every way or that the mindstates that drive people to either will lead to identical outcomes in the future.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-57386069-261/how-piracy-built-the-u.s-publishing-industry/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title

Quote:

According to the book, one of the most lucrative revenue streams for U.S. publishers during this period came from churning out unauthorized copies of British books before their rivals could. Authors didn't get a dime, say Burrows and Wallace. But don't feel too bad for the British publishers--they'd done exactly the same to French authors. ...

I think Answerman might wanna revise his comments abit....

All that's really being asked of you, as a fan, is to buy something, legitimately, if it is something you actually want. You don't live in North America? IMPORT THINGS. Support the artists you like, and support the companies that support those artists, and we can all go home and sleep soundly at night.