Who pushed users to piracy? Apart from the price, what motivates you to use pirated?

When it comes to piracy, people in the industry always use "thirst" to describe the Chinese public's popularity of piracy. But pirated this cup of poisoned wine can at least temporarily alleviate the pain of the larynx, and experience bad genuine but bitter let people simply can not swallow. If you are also a copyright owner, whether you are actively pushing users to piracy ...

Music does not sell, "because there is piracy ah"

The novel does not sell, "because there is piracy."

Movies don't sell, "because there's piracy."

Why is the user experience so bad?

"Because the user is also going to use pirated, do so good also sell not move." ”

Microsoft has launched a series of ads in China, which is characterized by a higher quality and a higher user experience than pirated versions of Windows Winodws. But this ad is actually not suitable for Windows, because a software is not very good because it is cracked to reduce its quality.

However, in video, music and text products, genuine legitimate than piracy has a higher quality. But that is not the case. Perhaps you do not believe, then we can simply through a few examples to prove this point:

A video site acquired the latest season of Japan's animation, so all the video site of the film screen animation, users were forced to see the ads and endure no play screen animation.

An audio site to the music sales, but its sale of music audio code rate of only 192Kbps, far less than the general distribution of pirated 320Kbps, the user spent money can only download to the bass quality music.

An ebook mall after half a year to launch the best-selling bestseller sales, typos than pirated, typesetting than EPUB and only in the crappy mall client read, the font can not be adjusted without night mode.

If you are interested in Internet content consumption of readers, should know more than a video site, an audio site and an E-book mall who. The point here is not to be a specific company, but to all those content providers who claim they are being dragged down by piracy: "Do users choose piracy because they can't afford it or don't want to spend it?" ”

According to 2012 years of Taobao Mobile shopping data show that 2012 wireless end Alipay turnover rate of up to 600%. Traditionally, the mobile end of the payment channel has been unblocked, users can easily through mobile phone in the mobile end of the payment and purchase operations. The promotion of genuine content has a very positive significance, because compared to the convenient purchase of mobile correct version, on the phone to find a downloadable pirated is a more difficult thing.

Envision a scene:

When you are about to go out or are already on the road, you suddenly think of a book that you want to read before you put it in your cell phone, and it's far ahead. You will choose to spend 1 minutes less than 2.99 yuan to buy a genuine? Or on the phone's small screen for a few 10 minutes to find a need not to register, download is not a compressed package of pirated Web sites to download piracy?

I think in this situation, most people will choose the former. What is the user experience, this is the user experience.

However, the reality is brutal, in addition to a very small number of legitimate content providers can provide a good experience, most of the domestic content provider's quality is not and piracy gap, and even less than the experience of piracy.

Still, for example, most e-book stores in the country limit the reading content that users buy to their clients because they are able to protect themselves from piracy through DRM. However, in the domestic e-book reading client, how many can do like iBooks and GoodReader as elegant and generous and meet customer needs?

By reading as a highlight, the user experience is not just a typo and typos (in fact, there are less and fewer typos), reading software features, fluency, fonts and typography on different devices, adding notes and annotations, reading schedules, and sharing paragraphs and sentences, These all have a serious impact on the user experience on electronic devices. Now that the content provider's product must be in the form of an app, the content provider must think of itself as an app developer, not just a mere attempt to flush the copyright.

Some digital channels, such as byte societies, that do very well in the user experience, can even reap the benefits of almost no DRM protection.

When users buy a book, a CD, a movie DVD, users can choose to use them in a variety of ways, as long as they do not violate copyright law. Proprietary DRM mechanisms deprive users of their rights:

The same ebook, when users buy a mall, the user should be the entire book reading rights, rather than "in a mall to read the entire book right." So when I found out that a mall client could only run on Android and I recently changed the IPhone, I should be able to download the same book for free at mall B.

As I have purchased CDs and DVDs, I have the right to copy the music on these CDs or the movies on the DVD to my mobile portable terminal, so that all is legal if it is for the user's own use (China's current law).

For the content of Internet copyright, we should establish a system of ownership transfer with mutual trust on the basis of DRM protection. When the user buys in a mall, the user can transfer the purchase record to the B Mall, or it will be transferred to other users when the user no longer needs it.

All this may sound too much to emphasize the interests of the user, in the content provider seems to be impossible. But just to think about it, if one day a content provider cannot continue to operate because of all the risks, all of the digital assets of the user will be destroyed along with the provider. Do you think users can accept such DRM?

Previously, Microsoft had adopted a very strict DRM protection when releasing a new generation of Xbox, which required players to register their Live IDs and stay online for a certain period of time to play and prohibit second-hand game trading. The consequences are simple, and the Xbox one has been hit by a consistent backlash from players and media, which has been defeated in the market's expectation of a total defeat of the PS4. Microsoft eventually had to announce the cancellation of all the new DRM mechanisms added to the Xbox one.

Chinese netizens said: "To be free", so piracy was born.

The development of Internet content in China can be used as well as free, and the defeat is free to describe. Because the internet is relatively late in China, and when the internet has just entered China, China's economic development level is not enough to support the relatively expensive content consumption system. As a result, free resources have become an important driver of internet popularization. At the beginning of 21st century, when ISDN and ADSL were popular, how many people were directed at free movies, music and huge resources on the Internet.

This also makes "I pay net fee, why download also want Money" this kind of rogue logic in China became mainstream public opinion.

Since reversing the inertia of the masses is something that only one or two companies cannot do, it must find a way to survive in this environment. In the field of online games, a little bit of understanding of the players will know that free games is more expensive than the time billing game method.

Since the piracy is blocked, it is better to direct the genuine free to users. However, even if it is sent, it will not necessarily lose money. E-books, videos, for example, can try to show more ads to free users when content is displayed, while paying users do not have ads to display. This is for the user, the content is free, and the payment is actually to the advertising service.

Another is the case for E-books, which is now an electronic era in which any electronic device can function as an e-reader. However, many of the best sellers of authentic electronic books tend to be more than paper books in the evening city months or even half a year, mainly because the booksellers believe that the electronic version and the paper version of the market will affect the profit (the electronic version is often sold more than the paper version of a lot lower). However, they ignore that this makes many users have a strong need for electronic reading can not choose a genuine, only the choice of pirated electronic version.

In fact, there is a "free" way to meet the needs of users and to meet booksellers ' price protection for bestsellers: bundling E-books with entities.

In this model, not only satisfies the user to the electronic version of the demand (many users in order to be able to read and choose pirated), but also to meet the book merchants on the price of new books to protect, achieve a double win.

In the three examples of e-books, videos and music mentioned in the first section, the video has changed. Now the video station of the bomb screen and the purchase of the copyright of the video station to cooperate, by the copyright station to provide video sources and advertising display, from the video station to do the flow of video footage and screen. Let the copyright party and the user experience can be guaranteed, this is the genuine future.