I got back into comics because of digital comic downloads. I rarely go to comic shops on wednesday, but because it is my hobby I find myself spending a hundred and some here or there to buy things I normally wouldn’t buy, such as all six issues of Civil War for sentimental reasons, the two Hip Flask hardcovers because they’re cool. Things like that.
If i bought every comic I read on the computer I could probably sustain Marvel myself, but I don’t have that sort of money, AND if I didn’t real digitalized comic books the industry wouldn’t get ANY of my money at all.

Yeah whenever I’ve downloaded comics, its to check them out and then if I like them, I’ll go out and buy the single issues or any collections they have available.

I’m certainly not saying my consumption somehow justifies my “illegal” consumption. For my income I contribute to the industry where I can. I spend a few thousand dollars a year on it, and that’s a big chunk of what a poor guy like me makes.
But even that doesn’t come closer to covering all the things I’m reading on my computer. My internet consumption certainly isn’t losing the industry any money, since as I pointed out before if I didn’t read them on my computer I wouldn’t read most of these comic books at all.
In fact,a large crackdown on digital comic books would completely deter me from reading anything produced by Marvel or DC as most of what I read belongs to them and I couldn’t even pretend to afford a tenth of my consumption of their comics.
Now, the ethics and such of digital consumption are a different topic altogether. This discussion is about whether illegal digital comics consumption is a problem to the industry or not. I’d say in at least my case it’s not.

Whatever you want to tell yourself to justify your actions doesn’t change the fact that you’re still stealing. This isn’t like with movies or music-although pirating either is stealing as well-comics don’t work the same way. We’re talking about a serial format where the sales of a book determines whether a book succeeds and whether the artist and writer get paid for future books. In movies or music the artists are fighting pirates for royalties. Comic creators are hardly that lucky.

Prem what you’re essentially saying is that as long as you’re free to steal as much as you want you’ll pay the companies whenever you choose to. That doesn’t exactly sound fair now does it? Perhaps you should spend your cash on artwork you can afford. I hear you can get a Double Digest of Archie for $2.50…

“are the same people who’ve never created anything of marketable value in their entire life.”

Well considering that that’s about 99 percent of the world, I don’t think its an easy problem to solve.

“Whatever you want to tell yourself to justify your actions doesn’t change the fact that you’re still stealing.”

Infringing copyright. Not stealing. Not even illegal in many countries. Using emotionally loaded words, particularly when they are incorrect, does not help to support your argument.

In any case: downloads are up, but sales are also up. There’s no credible evidence that Dan Slott has lost a single sale. There’s no credible evidence that downloading has hurt comic sales at all, ever.

Right now, I don’t see it as being a problem that will wipe out comics anymore than ebooks were supposed to replace print.

I think you can get a pretty good feel for whether you dig something reading preview pages rather than reading complete issues that somebody has worked on in the hopes of making money for their efforts.

And comics may be a different medium but the basic economics doesn’t change. The sales of movies, music, books, comics, etc. obviously determines how much work will be available in the future and who gets what work. Comic creators also make royalties but hardly in the amounts movies or music pulls in or doesn’t as the case may be.

Maybe to cut down on piracy, a reverse blacklist for the 21st century of digital pirates is in order. Artists can then calculate roughly what they’re due and then mug the people on the list. Fair’s fair.

I appreciate Old Timey Usenet Hack for jumping me to the punch.
Illegally downloading comics is not stealing in any way, shape, or form. My downloading a comic doesn’t take anything away from anyone.
But anyway, Tucker, calm down. You’re having an aneurysm over this. You’re also being rude, which isn’t necessary. No only do I buy Archie Digest I also buy the Double Digests whenever I see a new issue at a supermarket. Hell, this cheap ass also shelved out twenty five bucks last week to buy the original trade paperback of Mage volume 2. I could have bought TEN Archie digests! Oy Vey!
You still miss my point. I spend as much as I can on comics–which is more than I should. As comics are available for free on the internet it just allows me to take on my hobby at the level I would in material form were I a millionaire. My piracy loses the industry nothing. NOTHING. So beside the fact that it’s illegal, I’m not doing anything to hurt the comic book industry.
Hell, when I try to get my friends to read comic books, instead of sending them the comics on the computer (which costs me nothing) I go out any BUY them the comics I want them to read because that’s what they’re accustomed to. And I always buy them trades, never single issues.
And every time I meet a creator I certainly don’t have him sign prints I make from my digital comics, I buy something “legitimate.”
Hey, that’s an interesting idea. What if, like struggling musicians, creators did signing tours? That would probably encourage pirates to buy comics because I can’t imagine anyone in their right mind asking a creator to sign something they printed off their computer.
Lots of people like bitching about comics piracy but don’t really have any viable solutions to the problem. Stopping the pirates isn’t a solution. I don’t even see it as a problem as of yet, and there’s no evidence to show it is. In fact, evidence is to the contrary. Most digital comics communities no longer carry many smaller comics companies our of respect to the impact it CAN have on certain groups. SLG is a good example. I think once eyemelt.com opened just about everyone left them alone. Maybe if DC and Marvel (and everyone else for that matter) started making their comics available at reasonable prices even an evil miser like myself would start minimizing my sinful activities. Until then I’ll be waiting for my biweekly comics releases and save my money for ComiCon where I’m sure I’ll give the industry another few hundred of my dollars without any argument because I love comic books and want to support the industry as much as I CAN.

Frankly, this is the same arguments that we always see. But for me it comes down to this, just because you peronsally can not afford something does NOT mean it should be free. It means either you do without or find a way to earn more. Plain and simple. As to downloads increasing readers? Yes it probably does. But out of the 3 people i know personally that used to read comics, all three of them cancelled their pull lists entirely and now read ALL the comics they want for free. And In fact the only cases I have heard of people suposedly increasing their buying from downloading is on the internet, which as we all know, means some-all of them are probably lying.
I will never understand why someone would not want to pay for somethign that barings them joy, let alone fight over the fact it should be free.

“It means either you do without or find a way to earn more.”

Or borrow a friend’s copy! Comics, like most periodicals, have ALWAYS had a readership well in excess of their actual paid circulation. Back in the news-stand days individual issues would be passed round circles of friends, and when I got into comics aged 11-12 this was how my friends and I split the cost - I bought WATCHMEN, he bought DARK KNIGHT, some other poor sucker ended up with ADOLESCENT RADIOACTIVE BLACK BELT HAMSTERS. We all read all three of them.

File-sharing of comics breaks the social element which has always stopped this lending being an economic problem - now one person can virtually ‘lend’ to millions.

But just as there’s no right to own something you can’t afford, there’s nothing to say that reading must always go hand-in-hand with owning.

Downloading suggests that there’s a huge number of people who want to read comics but don’t care about owning, collecting or keeping them. There must be a way of satisfying those customers at a lower price point: if the industry sticks to “own or nothing” it will end up in serious trouble.

Re: post 20

Exactly. Doubly so when you consider that all Region 2 players have to output NTSC (since Japan is in R2 and NTSC), and it’s easy to buy R2 discs that ship to the States online the States online, yet Mister Slott sees it as perfectly alright to download (e.g.) Torchwood while TAKING MONEY OUT OF THE BBC’S POCKET by doing so.

Curious, no?

So taking without payment or permission something for which you ordinarily have to pay isn’t stealing, it’s copyright infringement? You do learn lots on the interweb.

Kevin, it means exactly what I said.

Look at the link in this very blog post (http://www.comicscrew.com/dan-slott-on-downloading-comics/). There is a screenshot of just how much Slott has downloaded and uploaded there. It shows that he has downloaded 11.60 GB and uploaded 10.80 GB.

It’s all there in the link. He does what he asks others not to do.

Kevin, it weakens both his position and his argument. I think that’s plain to see.

No one seems to have addressed the critical point mentioned above, which is that downloading comics cannot be stealing IF THE PERSON DOWNLOADING HAD NO INTENTIONS TO BUY BEFORE DOWNLOADING.

That’s like saying because I go into a comic book store and look at the covers, I owe a nickel to all the cover artists, because I took their art without paying for it.

No one seems to have addressed the critical point mentioned above, which is that downloading comics cannot be stealing IF THE PERSON DOWNLOADING HAD NO INTENTIONS TO BUY BEFORE DOWNLOADING.

How does intent come into play?

If I take a candy bar from the store, but don’t intend to eat it …

Not the same thing - if you take a candy bar from a store, you prevent the store from selling that bar.

“How does intent come into play?

If I take a candy bar from the store, but don’t intend to eat it …”

Strawman.

Taking a candy bar from the store [without paying], regardless of what you intend to do with it, deprives the store owner of the candy bar (an item with intrinsic value which was purchased by him at a cost) without paying him due compensation. He is no longer able to sell that item to recoup his costs, and thus incurs a financial loss.

That is stealing by definition.

Downloading a copy of a scanned comic (regardless of intention) deprives nobody of the physical comic, or the digital file of the scan for that matter. Nothing is stolen; all physical objects remain in the possession of their owners.

That is not stealing.

If the person downloading had no intention to buy before downloading, then no money is really involved either. Revenue can only be considered to have been forgone by the publisher if the download is of an item which would otherwise have been purchased by the downloader had the download not been available.

The difference matters.

Copyright is an arbitrary legal concept covering the reproduction of information during a defined, limited time period. Every day, copyright expires on items of sufficient age, creating the situation where taking a copy today is totally legal, whereas taking a copy yesterday is infringement.

None of this is stealing, or “piracy”.

It’s simply infringement of copyright, as defined in a particular legal jurisdiction. As stated above, this may or may not be illegal, or even a valid legal concept, depending on where you live.

Join date: January / 19 / 2007
Downloaded: 11.60 GB
Uploaded: 10.80 GB

I think we’re all overlooking an important point. Namely, that Slott doesn’t have a 1:1 share ratio.

Dan -

I downloaded all of volume 1 of She-Hulk, loved it, and started buying volume 2.

Would you like me to stop?

Can anyone recommend any good sites to download comics?

Chris, it’s not semantics: Slott’s apparent (illegal) downloading may make his stance hypocritical, but it doesn’t affect the larger argument.

And that larger argument is very much the issue.

“Chris wrote: “The whole idea of ‘illegally’ downloading comics would be a moot point if the comic companies would realize just how many people out there like, or even prefer, to have comics in a digital format.”

Ideally, every reader could have any comic available in whatever format he or she wishes. That’s just not going to happen anytime soon. But why is the (apparently acceptable) response, “They’re not going to release it in the format I choose, so I’ll get it illegally”?

There’s also the question of whether making those comics available digitally, for a price, would significantly alter the reading, or downloading, habits of those now getting the comics for free.

Chris wrote: “I think that creators should also receive royalties from the sales of digital issues.”

We can agree on that, at least. In the meantime, creators aren’t seeing royalties on illegally downloaded issues.

Chris wrote: “… I know that you’re a creator as well, so you may feel like you have more at stake concerning this …”

Yes, and I know you download comics, so I don’t think we’ll see eye-to-eye in this discussion.

I think the only thing here that damages Dan’s credibility is the claim that he’d buy Torchwood DVDs the minute they hit the States. I mean, come on, Dan - if you’ve seen them, you KNOW they just aren’t worth the bother.

tom daylight:

Did you see all of the Torchwood episodes? Great ending, dude. Give ‘em a shot. I really liked the series. Can’t wait for Season 2.

Dan Slott is awesome. Let me start by saying that. But the issue of file sharing is extremely tricky.

I wrote a comic called ARCHENEMIES for Dark Horse. It’s out in trade now. I would love it if you all ran out and bought copies today. BUT I’m resigned to the fact that a certain percentage of comic book readers have no intention of buying my comic and never will.

If those people - who are never ever going to ever ever buy my comic - decide to download a scanned copy, that’s a win for me. If they like the comic, they may well decide to pay money for the next one.

Unfortunately, “never ever” is not a particularly effective legal term.

And I sympathize with Dan. I don’t want people thinking, “I *could* pay $X for my comic, but why would I when I can just download the thing for free?” That’s money out of our pockets.

Advanced technologies require advanced ethics, and I’d just like everyone to think through these issues and behave responsibly.

Or, if you’d rather boil it down to bumper sticker simplicity: “Don’t be a jerk.”

I download comics. I’ll admit it. But by and large, the ones I download are either a) comics I own that I need high-res scans of for one reason or another or b) old comics that, while I’m still geek enough to track down a physical copy, are $20 or more each — and the creators wouldn’t see a dime of that.

Occasionally, I’ll download a title I spot on the list out of curiosity, since many titles don’t have free online copies. I don’t really have the budget to splurge every week just to see if a title is worth it. The times that it is, I’ll gladly pick up a physical copy at the comic shop. I downloaded Captain America #25 since all the articles piqued my curiosity and I didn’t want to be another speculator taking an issue away from someone who’s been following the title.

Matt:

“Anyway, this is indicative of the incendiary nature of this issue: Instead of discussing how the industry needs to figure out digital downloads in some form very soon, we’re debating “stealing.””

Thank you, Matt. The industry shouldn’t be afraid of it, but embrace it.

I download (not upload) comics every week. I skim through them and delete those that do not interest me. I burn the remaining ones to DVD and make a list of them in order to buy the trades when they are available from Amazon.com. If they are kept, then there is a matching issue
or trade in my possession within 6 months.

Why do I do this?

I do this because the disparity between what Marvel and DC promise and what they actually deliver is breathtaking. I get the distinct impression that press or interviews from Marvel and DC are nothing more than carnival barkers trying to reel in a mark. “Come one, come all! See the bearded lady! You won’t want to miss this!” has been replaced with “Nothing will EVER be the same! The Status Quo will be forever changed! You won’t want to miss this!” I want stories that will engage me, not leave me with disappointment and regret that I just wasted 4 bucks I could have put in my gas tank.

I do this because comic stores no longer allow you to skim through issues to make a better choice. “No READING” and “Do not open if you are not buying” signs are in almost every store now. How else am I to interpret this other than the stores know there’s a lot of crap on the shelves?

I do this because manga has spoiled me. A complete story, beginning, middle, and end -all written and drawn by the same person - most more than 1,000 pages long - where there is an actual struggle with consequences! Company-wide cross-overs and major events that are swept under the carpet a month later just don’t do it for me anymore.

I would have wasted thousands of dollars by now if this outlet wasn’t available to me. I would have kept buying Infinite Crisis or Civil War hoping it got better. But . . . maybe . . . that’s what they want, what they count on to balance the books.

I know I WOULDN’T have discovered Walking Dead, Invincible, American Virgin, Shanna,
Rann-Thanagar War, Ivan Reiss, Frank Cho, Deadman, DC New Frontier, PVP, Hunter-Killer, WANTED, GIRLS, Mystery in Space, DC’s Earth-2 Adventure Comics that have been recently-collected into Trades, Darwyn Cooke, The Spirit, Spiderman Loves Mary Jane, Exiles, the newest X-factor series, and Howard chaykin’s Hawkgirl and Blade series.

Yes, there are those that download comics and never buy any of them. But there are people like me. The question to Marvel and DC is: Are you going to rise to meet these challenges? This new, potential audience? Or will you throw the baby out with the bath water?

My prediction? I wouldn’t want to be that baby.

“If the person downloading had no intention to buy before downloading, then no money is really involved either. Revenue can only be considered to have been forgone by the publisher if the download is of an item which would otherwise have been purchased by the downloader had the download not been available.”

If the person downloading had no intention of buying then they shouldn’t be allowed to read the comic. If they can’t afford it or it’s out of reach then they should wait for the trade. Yeah the system sucks and somebody should create an ITunes system for it or whatever Chris Hunter is describing but that hasn’t happened yet so you should just deal with it. It’s not the big events that are being affected here, it’s the smaller books that are always on the razor’s edge of being cancelled.

And every argument that’s being thrown around about Slott’s download record isn’t changing the fact that if She-Hulk get’s cancelled then everybody who downloaded it, liked it, and never paid for it should be punched in the face. We’re not talking about royalties so much as whether people have a JOB next month.

Plus it’s insulting to the people who shell out our hard earned money each month for a comic to tell us it doesn’t matter whether somebody paid to read it or not. We’re the ones who have to decide whether to add something to our pull list or drop it. So to tell us that it’s fine for YOU to be able to download whatever you want as long as you pay for what you can when you feel like is just a shot bird in the face. If you can’t afford it then don’t read it. Buy what you can. Deal with the way things are until the inevitable change finally comes.

“Infringing copyright. Not stealing. Not even illegal in many countries. ”

Whether you like it or not, “infringing copyright” by definition is wrong. Morally, ethically, and most of the time LEGALLY wrong. When your argument comes down to whether or not something is stealing of just infringing on copyright then you’ve totally lost the moral high ground and the point.

And to the argument about sharing with a group of friends being no different: Well there’s a difference between 3 or 4 friends and 3 or four HUNDRED “friends” now isn’t there?

now everyone that didn’t already know how can sign up at demonoid and start downloading comics

“Slott is downloading films that are UNAVAILABLE IN AMERICA.”

I cannott speak to everything Mr. Slott downloads. He mentions Torchwood specifically, so I will continue to use it as an example.

Mr. Slott justifies downloading Torchwood because it has not been released on DVD for the North American market. It has, however, been released for the UK market. My point is that he could purchase Torchwood via an online UK-based retailer, but chooses not to, I presume because the cost of overseas shipping and the requisite region-free DVD player is more than Mr. Slott is willing to pay. He is making the choice to download material for free that is available to him by legitimate means.

Mr. Slott asks Demonoid users to refrain from downloading his work, and to instead purchase them in stores or online. He is, in essence, asking Demonoid users not to make the same choice that he is making by downloading Torchwood. The fact that Torchwood has not been released to the US market is irrelevant. We have no way of knowing where Demonoid users are located and whether or not Mr. Slott’s work is available locally, but Mr. Slott asks them to purchase the material at online retailers.

Obviously, it makes sense that Mr. Slott would like users to pay for his work rather than consume it for free. I argue, however, that it is hypocritical of him to make this request of Demonoid users while continuing to download copyrighted material himself.

“If the person downloading had no intention to buy before downloading, then no money is really involved either. Revenue can only be considered to have been forgone by the publisher if the download is of an item which would otherwise have been purchased by the downloader had the download not been available.”

If the person downloading had no intention of buying then they shouldn’t be allowed to read the comic.

So you’re saying I don’t have the right to let my brother/uncle/whatever borrow it and read it? Because they’re not willing to pay for it?

If they can’t afford it or it’s out of reach then they should wait for the trade. Yeah the system sucks and somebody should create an ITunes system for it or whatever Chris Hunter is describing but that hasn’t happened yet so you should just deal with it. It’s not the big events that are being affected here, it’s the smaller books that are always on the razor’s edge of being cancelled.

Maybe the reason that some of the best titles are so close to being canceled is that the comic buying population is so inbred without newsstands that all the majority wants to read is the moderate titles - those that are not great but not bad, also those that are squarely in the center of their respective squared universes (aka receive the most publicity, etc)and any way of garnering new customers (accepting the cash cow that is civil war/cap 25) is almost impossible.

And every argument that’s being thrown around about Slott’s download record isn’t changing the fact that if She-Hulk get’s cancelled then everybody who downloaded it, liked it, and never paid for it should be punched in the face. We’re not talking about royalties so much as whether people have a JOB next month.

Just because you like something does NOT mean that you would be willing to spend 40 dollars a year buying issues of it.

This doesn’t make it right, but it also is a reality. People download music and movies illegally. They’re having the same issue, except for unlike those other two, comic book collectors/readers are collectors, not just readers, so it’d be near impossible to get rid of the written comic book (but i do see a future without CDs and once internet technology catches up, without DVDs)

I’ve been collecting comics since i was a child, and i can tell you i HATE the comic book format. It is flimsy, easy to rip and crinkle, etc. the stories are never long enough, and the ads these days detract majorly from the content. Not to mention that there has been a lot of junk put out over the last ten years.

Would i spend more money on X-men if i got a novel sized story every month? Without a doubt. But that’s not going to happen and waiting for paperbacks is painful since by the time you read it, the team is on their next storyline, moving forward without you.

Comic Books are books. You can go to the library and read about your favorite novelised heroes there. Is this copyright infringement?

Would there be less people downloading comics if they were available at their local library? Perhaps, but why is this library any different from downloading? Didn’t the author only get the revenue from that book once (just like if it were a comic book). Should we close down all libraries?

Plus it’s insulting to the people who shell out our hard earned money each month for a comic to tell us it doesn’t matter whether somebody paid to read it or not. We’re the ones who have to decide whether to add something to our pull list or drop it. So to tell us that it’s fine for YOU to be able to download whatever you want as long as you pay for what you can when you feel like is just a shot bird in the face. If you can’t afford it then don’t read it. Buy what you can. Deal with the way things are until the inevitable change finally comes.

Without any easy access to comic books today (where i lived when i was a kid, the nearest comic book store was in a part of the city that my parents would never go to) many people can’t get to a shop. Is that their fault? They could order online, but in my opinion, this brings to light a falsity in thinking. This is no ones fault but the publishers. if they really longed for those sales, they’d be available at more than just your local comic book store, which may be 25 miles away.

The perfect places to sell these comic books would be at places like Toys R Us, Best Buy, Gamestop, Barnes and Noble.

Book Stores
Video Game Stores
Movie Stores
Toy Stores

all places where their future base readership is quietly fading away due to lack of availability and mainstream presence.

If everyone just “deals with the way things are until the change inevitable comes”, then guess what, that change will not inevitable come. Do you think if Marvel and DC could be promised thats they wouldn’t have to deal with people trying to illegally download comic books ever again, that they would ever get to the point where comic books are a digital medium? No…the thing pushing them to make it digital would be the illegal downloads. Just like for music and movies, the illegal downloading is the push the industry needs to grow into its digital form.

“Infringing copyright. Not stealing. Not even illegal in many countries. ”

Whether you like it or not, “infringing copyright” by definition is wrong. Morally, ethically, and most of the time LEGALLY wrong. When your argument comes down to whether or not something is stealing of just infringing on copyright then you’ve totally lost the moral high ground and the point.

I submit that copyright infringement is breaking a US law. Do not, however, say that breaking a copyright is by definition wrong. Many countries have no copyright laws.

In my opinion, the copyright code has to be rewritten for a downloading age, it is so archaic that it can’t even work any longer within its own established rules and regulations.

And to the argument about sharing with a group of friends being no different: Well there’s a difference between 3 or 4 friends and 3 or four HUNDRED “friends” now isn’t there?

Only if any of those 3 0r four HUNDRED friends would have bought it otherwise, which isn’t always the case.

Many people see free, and read it anyways, even if they otherwise wouldn’t. Some of these people who download are the people that skim the books in the shops or wait for spoilers online, etc. None of those are illegal, and yet they have exactly the same effect.

In all these cases, no one without half a brain would say “this is bad for the industry” because it isn’t. It is helping the industry grow to areas where it otherwise wouldn’t - including online, places without access to shops, and don’t forget - if you read something for free and then enjoy it, you might just pick it up at the store next time you see it or heaven forbid search out more from this character or more from the artist/writer. and this time you may be willing to PAY for it!

Must be bad business when companies scare away profits. That’s what the music industry ended up doing by suing college students. What is happeining now? Itunes is slowly removing DRM protection from it’s songs…

All things in time come full circle..

You make some very good points, Eric. I had completely forgotten about the library model. People only pay late fees for those books.

i think thats pretty shitty one minutes telling people not to download his work because it takes away his hard work, but then when his own downloading comes into question, he justifies it to availability.
That is a poor shitty excuse to justify his own bad habitats. Just because some of the work he mentions is not available to buy in the U.S., he stealing from those foreign artists who deserve just as much as he does.
It sucks when people use that excuse of availability because i myself am a huge fan of Anime, and that shit is expensive when you pay 29.99 per dvd of a respective series. Maybe if more of these free loaders bought the stuff they say they love so much comics, anime and other stuff,these hobbies wouldn’t be so expensive.
By saying it’s different for movies,TV, and music doesn’t change the fact your still stealing away from potential sales and viewer ship.
At least if he came out admitted to his own fault and left it at that instead of coming out with some lame justification for his own action i would have had some respect.

Meh, I OWN a comic store, and I have no problem with downloading comics. Whatever gets comics into more people’s hands is always a good thing. Most of the downloaders I know buy comics because they download them first to see if they like it. No real difference than going to a library, or reading them on the shelf at the store.

There have been various polls on some comic download sites, and the results are always the same…people buy more comics when they download them. Sure, I mean, the voters could be lying, but why would they?

Like I always say, whether it’s comics, music, movies, etc…downloading promotes quality. I think that’s what scares some of these companies.

“I appreciate Old Timey Usenet Hack for jumping me to the punch.
Illegally downloading comics is not stealing in any way, shape, or form. My downloading a comic doesn’t take anything away from anyone.”

Are you kidding me, Perm?!?!? You realize that YOUR downloading comics takes the following things away:

-Money from retailers. Moeny they need to combat rising rent prices to stay open and offering comics.

-Money from the creators. They- not just the comic companies- make money off of every issue sold.

You are getting these comics illegally. They are stolen property once you download it. It’s disgusting. Period.

My $.02

1. I think people should be allowed to SKIM a comic book in a store to get a sense of what they are buying. I think store owners are within their rights to ask that they not read the entire thing without buying.

2. Having comics available to be borrowed at a library is entirely different from making them available for download. In one case, the number of users at a time is sharply limited. In the other case, the number of simultaneous users is potentially far greater than the copy purchased to produce the scan. The same goes with loaning copies to your friends. Loaning 1 purchased copy to 1 friend is different from simultaneously loaning it to 1,000 friends while still having access to the original.

3. I think that people who talk about their downloading unauthorized scans or songs being beneficial to the creators or the companies that own the rights to the material is the height of arrogance. Nowadays, any musician who wants their songs available for downlode can do so. Any comics company that wants to make their product available on line can do so. No one has the right to make that decision for them simply because they are unhappy that the format they like is unavailable.

4. I agree that with the demand apparently there it would make sense for companies to explore the download option, but that doesn’t give anyone the license to steal in the interim.

ummm…I may just be way behind the times but where would I even go to download comics? Do folks really take the time to scan the pages into their computer and then put them on websites. Seems like a lot of work compared to downloading music or even movies.

Heh … she’s only giving the bird to people who illegally downloaded her comics.

“Meh, I OWN a comic store, and I have no problem with downloading comics. (—) Most of the downloaders I know buy comics because they download them first to see if they like it.”

Ryan, I hate to point out the obvious but…

Most of the downloaders you DON’T know don’t come into your store because they can get the comics you’re selling for free.

On a related note, I distinctly recall the RIAA (a) commissioning a study to prove that illegal downloading was killing the music industry, and then (b) promptly scuttling the results as soon as their own study appeared to indicate that musical artists who allowed downloads actually saw a notable increase in their album sales (with Radiohead even going so far as to say in the press that they attributed those increased sales to illegal downloads).

Let’s be clear about one thing. Grabbing a couple of comics I had at hand:

from Buffy #1, inside front cover: “No portion of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the express written permission of Dark Horse Comics, Inc.”

from Walking Dead #33, inside front cover: “No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means…” and so on. You see where I’m going with this, right?

Whatever you say to justify it, downloading copyrighted comics is a crime. Intent to buy doesn’t enter into it. Marvel or DC’s willingness (or lack thereof) to provide digital content doesn’t enter into it.

If you lend it to a friend, it’s legal. If you e-mail your friend a scanned copy, it’s illegal. If you read it at the library, it’s legal. If you go down to Kinko’s and get your comics photocopied, it’s illegal. Whether it’s a digital copy or a physical copy, IT’S ILLEGAL. Don’t tell me otherwise and don’t kid yourself.

Should people be allowed to disobey any law they don’t agree with?

Thank God THAT’s settled.

I download rare comics that are all most impossible to find or are out of print.

I support the creators I like by buying their stuff but if its something I’m not sure about, I’ll DL’ed it first then buy it if I like it. I hate reading off a computer screen. I also delete the comic I DL’ed after I checked it out/bought it.

I’ve downloaded comics, but I try to get the physical comics, my problem (or excuse) is that I live outside the US, and in my country you can only get those comics that are really popular, like the ones who are in the Top 50 or something, but for instance, things like She-Hulk, Runaways or Walking Dead are impossible to get, so I get those from the net. I know is illegal, but there is no other way.

You can purchase a DVD player for 30 dollars at suncoast that takes 5 minutes to unlock and make region free. It is made by Coby. You can puchase non bootleg import DVD’s through Amazon UK. It is convenient, and inexpensive.
I purchase import DVDs from Amazon.UK that will probably never see the light of day in America, and I purchase them all of the time. I would never stoop so low as to illegally download copies.
So I don’t accept that excuse for downloading.
I also don’t accept the excuse that someone gave how comics don’t deliver. Previews is pretty detailed, and what you don’t get from Previews, you can pretty much get from Newsarama these days. If a book features a writer or artist you are unfamiliar with, or you are uncertain if the storyline is to your liking, than you just don’t order it. And maybe, your local comic shop doesn’t want you reading the comics becuase, if you read the book and don’t buy it, you’ve now turned the store into a library, and you’re probably bending and damaging something that also doubles as a collectible, is that so hard to understand?
I don’t think that the comic industry is afraid of downloading, I think that there needs to be a combined effort to get control of this illegal downloading, much as they did with the music industry. And the other thing is, they need to find a way to replace the illegal downloading with legal downloading, but I think there really isn’t a market for legal downloading, because if people actually had to pay for it, they’d rather just get a paper comic instead. Unlike with the music, people, in my opinion, are genuinely cheating, or stealing, and taking money out of writer and artists pockets by not buying the comics, and illegally downloading the comics instead. I don’t think it’s a case where, with teh music, that someone is going to turn around and actually buy the comic after they have read an illegally downloaded copy, whereas with the music, the argument was that people would buy the song after they downloaded it.

Random Thoughts:

K-Box, I’ve missed you.

I’m very disappointed this thread didn’t reach 100 in 24 hours. People need to get on the ball.

Never before has Logic seemed so stupid.

Obviously this should end with some sort of download service being provided by the big two.

Obviously that also won’t stop people from downloading illegally, but it will wipe away most of their arguments.

A library can’t serve nearly as many people as the internet so how is that argument supposed to work again.

Nobody in this debate will ever really change their opinion.

Those who continue to download comics without paying will keep doing so and will justify it in their minds any way they can.

Those who think it’s wrong aren’t going to change.

Dan Slott is still one of the best writers in the business and deserves your cash not cries of hypocrisy.

I’ll be pissed if She-Hulk ever get’s cancelled again.

And finally:

Fanboy Rampage!!!

Don’t libraries in the US pay authors when books are lent out? They do in other countries.

Speaking of other countries, this: “Many countries have no copyright laws” is either plain wrong or uses a very unusual meaning of the word “many”. There are over 180 states that are party to the World Intellectual Property Organisation.

Feh. I don’t believe that downloading is going to hurt the product, it can be a very useful tool to HELP the product more than anything.

Piracy is just a fact of life. Everyone is always going to try to get something for nothing. Look at what the MPAA and the RIAA are doing, they’re making a lot of noise but are they stopping pirates? No, if anything their tactics are keeping people from being sympathetic to their cause.

I’m not advocating theft. I am just saying that there is no way to completely stop it, but you CAN turn it to your advantage. Look at what iTunes has done for music. Whereas people were pirating millions of albums because they really just wanted one or two songs, can now just buy those one or two songs.

Comic books are now charging $3 for 22 pages, people who are not predisposed to buying a monthly product the way the built in fans (who buy every Wed even if they no longer like the direction of the book) are not going to spend that on something like a comic.

However, if you charge 0.99 an issue, or x amount a year to subscribe to their download plan, they could move their lower selling titles to an online only arena and try to build an audience that “waits for the trade.”

No more cancelations of a critically acclaimed, yet poor selling title because you cut your overhead to near nothing.

People like Penny-Arcade have built a multi-million dollar empire on webcomics, and that’s just with advertising at the like. If they ever invested taking on a thing similar to CTRL+ALT+DEL for a “paid membership bonus” thing, which they’ll never do they could triple that.

It’s not cut and dry of this is hurting sales… There are dozens of factors that are hurting sales, the downloaders are actually bringing readers into comics. Comic book stores are not as widely accessible as some people may think. There are a great many people that go unserviced because their “local shop” is the next town over, or further which means a half hour or more out of their way once a week/month for little return.

The direct market is been the driving force of the sales bust, limiting our product is the surest way to keep the industry a niche business at best.

2 years from now, or sooner, someone is going to harness the .cbr/.cbz format into a cash business and have a comic version of iTunes out there. (I am aware that there are some sites starting this now, but have yet to really catch up with the technology)

People should be less worried about what a segment of people who would steal a product no matter how available it is *could* do and more on how they can capitalize on a growing trend with hundreds of possiblities for business growth. But then again everyone is entitled to their opinion, just voicing mine.

from Buffy #1, inside front cover: “No portion of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the express written permission of Dark Horse Comics, Inc.”

how exactly does the above make it legal to “lend it to a friend” or make it available in a library?

technically, isn’t it “transmitted” when I hand a physical copy to my friend and say, “here, read this”?

at this point, I’d like to echo a comment made someplace above (at least, I think it was, and if not, I’m making it now):

Dan Slott is a writer for Marvel Comics. Ostensibly, he has the ear at some point of someone at Marvel who is an editor, marketing person, in charge of distribution, etc.

Why is his response to beg US not to download his comics for free, when it should be to push THEM to provide a paying solution that will help him get money?

Is Dan Slott the Lars Ulrich of comics???

The concept of attributing proper credit and compensation for a person’s work or ideas has been around for a long time, as in centuries, and the Prohibition analogy is loose, problematic, and ultimately serves to distract more than contribute to the real issues at hand.

Need I remind people that the mainstream comics industry was built on the backs of good people that got royally screwed out of proper credit and compensation for their creations? You think the good, hard fight for creator rights in the past few decades is just going to roll over and die because some people say it has no place in the new digital order? Looks like a second Civil War may be brewin’…

If everything should be free and opensourced, I guess that puts an end to the careers of creative professionals everywhere, and really professionals in all fields for that matter.

“Logic- anyone who downloads a comic *ILLEGALLY* is in possession of somethin that is for sale which they did NOT pay for. That is the very definition of theft. I don’t see where any “justification” for that criminal behavior is ever right.

Comment by JDEANFAN — April 2, 2007″

So if my friend lent me a copy of Spider-man but I didn’t pay for it is that theft? If I found that same comic in the street should I sent Marvel a check? Sides How can Slott tell people not to use Bit-torrent if he himself uses it?

If I wanted to buy somethign I will, but If i’m midly interested I will skim it at the bookstore, borrow it, or download it, it’s all the same thing.

Spidey, do you really not see a difference between lending a single copy of a comic to a friend and creating a copy (a scan) and making it available for download by an infinite number of people?

“Spidey, do you really not see a difference between lending a single copy of a comic to a friend and creating a copy (a scan) and making it available for download by an infinite number of people?”

yeah no, mainly cause most downloaders are cheap bastards who don’t buy anything, so if downloading didn’t exist they still wouldn’t buy the comics. I know some hardcore downloaders, and let me tell you they only buy what they need, they download cause it existed. Do you really think if we could eliminate all downloading that sales would go up 1000%? It’s naive to think otherwise.

It’s like a circle.

One side lays out all the legal, moral, and ethical reasons why something is wrong.

Then the other side makes as many excuses as possible for why it’s ok.

These excuses range from:

It’s the LAW that’s wrong, it should be changed so I’m right to defy it.

The guy who asked me not to does it as well, therefore I’m right to do it.

There are lot’s of legal ways to do it that are similar but don’t have the same scope, so I’m totally right to do something illegal.

I’m not really hurting the industry so it’s ok.

At this point I think that if you’re just going to say whatever you want to justify your actions then why even engage in the debate? Seriously, what can be accomplished by coming on here and trying to justify your actions? You’re just going to keep doing it anyway, so this thread is pointless. If you’re not going to respond to someone politely asking you to stop stealing from himself and his co-workers then you’re too morally bankraupt to care anymore anyway so just go about your business and drop it.

In other words these 107 have changed the opinion of nobody. There’s no way to win a debate when one side refuses to accept truth and will say anything to defend it’s guilt. One must ask though, what’s the point in putting up such a fight for something you’re going to keep doing anyway? erhaps you’re not just trying to justify your actions to others…

Incidentally, because it should be said…

WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON?!

Comment by Tuckenie (Chris Tucker) — April 3, 2007 @ 1:20 pm

You know, one of the reasons that people fall into a defensive crouch and start to rationalize behavior they know to be wrong is that people like you are so demeaning and mean-spirited about things that it makes it virtually impossible to concede your point. Even knowing you’re right or mostly right, there’s a desire to disagree with you just to NOT be part of the group you’re in.

Whose side am I on…?

There’s no question that since Dan is telling you to do as he says, but not as he does, that he himself has no credibility in this argument. But it’s an important one nonetheless.

I don’t think I need to remind people that the mainstream comic book industry was built on the backs of good people who got royally screwed out of proper credit and proper compensation for their work and ideas.

Should the good, hard fight for creator rights in the past few decades roll over and die because some people would have us believe that it has no place in the new digital order?

I guess we could open source everything and everybody could work for free but unfortunately that’s in direct conflict with the economic reality known as the “cost of living” in providing the basics for yourself and maybe a family as is often the case.

Tuckenie, the problem with your argument is that, in many cases, laws are wrong, and that’s why they get changed.

And as for your idea that the only reason people are against copyright laws is because they’re selfish, again, I’d remind you that I make a living off my writing, and I still think that the current copyright laws are wrong - and I say this even though, if those copyright laws were repealed, there’s a good chance I’d be out of a job.

Support Demonoid! Download Avengers: The Initiative #1 and Torchwood tomorrow!

Trying to cover a lot of ground here:

At this point in the debate, most people seem to agree it illegal. And the argument tends to lean more towards justifying downloading anyway. My response on a few of the points raised here…

As for file-sharing hurting retail sales, I think it’s pretty clear it does. How many record stores have closed down in your town/city in the last few years? Where I live, quite a few. Why would comic buyers be any different from record buyers?

As for Dan Slott downloading habits - I really don’t care. His credibility might be diminished but the argument is still valid. If you believe that you should be allowed to download because he downloads, then, really - wouldn’t it make sense for you to contact every author of a work you intend to download and ask if THEY download? I hear Alan Moore doesn’t have an internet connection, so downloading Watchmen is clearly wrong. Then again, Dave Gibbons is a tech-savvy guy, does he download? Maybe it’s okay to download the text but not the pictures?

And finally, 1) “it’s an unenforcable law” and 2) “it’s the LAW that’s wrong, it should be changed so I’m right to defy it.”

Regarding 1) : Yes, it’s an unenforcable law. But that doesn’t factor into if it’s morally and ethically wrong or right. If you boil it down, you’re saying: “It’s only stealing if you get caught.”

As for 2) : Okay, This is probably the only argument I’m willing to concede holds water. If the law is wrong (as a lot of you clearly think), then it’s an act of protest and rebellion to download comics. However, I don’t think many downloaders have thought it through that thoroughly. So please, everyone, take a moment and ask yourself that question.

Should copyright laws be changed? Should you be allowed to reproduce art without compensating the artist? Should art be free for everyone?

If someone can explain to me how downloading a scanned comic is wrong whereas borrowing a comic from the library is somehow Okay, then maybe they’ll have a leg to stand on, but until comic publishers, music distributors, home video distributors and book publishers start to crack down on libraries, then they’ll have no legs to stand on.

As for file-sharing hurting retail sales, I think it’s pretty clear it does. How many record stores have closed down in your town/city in the last few years? Where I live, quite a few. Why would comic buyers be any different from record buyers?

I’ll attribute the closing of those stores to illegal downloads when you prove to me it isn’t spurred on more likely/analogously by:

1) lack of need to leave your home due to digital terchnologies

2) coupons/links and value cards for music at the electronic/computer stores where most MP3 p[layers (and even the software that comes with it) are purchased hence no need to go to a record/music store

“Don’t libraries in the US pay authors when books are lent out? They do in other countries.”

I highly doubt it. Most libraries I know of get by on donations from the public just to be able to by new product and pay their staff.

Re: comment 123, in many countries the public lending right compensates authors for the impact on sales that arises from a library making their work freely available. But, in any event, the impact of 1 copy of a book being lent to 1 individual for a couple of weeks is clearly of a different order to the impact of 1 copy being lent to everybody who has an internet connection.

Except it isn’t one copy, and it isn’t one individual. Let’s say we’re talking about the book Harry Potter and the Sorcerers -Philosophers- Stone, instead of a comic book (due to comic books’ limited availability in libraries, this model doesn’t work well with comics ATM)

If each library has ten copies of the book and there are approximately 117,467 libraries in the United States alone. That means there are 1,174,670 copies of Harry Potter and the Socrerer’s Stone to lend - indefinitly, until the books need to be thrown away.

In one year alone, there is potential for each of those books to be borrowed ~17 times a year (3 weeks per person, 52 weeks a year.

Over the course of the year that means Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone was read by people who DIDNT pay ANYTHING for the book about 19,969,390 - and that doesn’t count if people lent them out before they returned them to the library.

How can you say that even a fraction of that 19,969,390 is not greater or equal to the number of people downloading comics today?

When is the last time a comic book sold 19,000,000 copies anyway?

So is a library really that insignificant a factor in all of this? some libraries have far more than ten comic books each in their stacks - and that doesn’t even count TPB’s, Graphic Novels, novel adaptations, or hardcovers.

So is there really no impact?

The reason people are illegally downloading comics can often be attributed to the fact it’s easier than going to a store and trying to find a comic, it’s cheaper than spending $3 or more for a comic, and it’s convenient.

A parallel can be found within the webcomic world. When Modern Tales started competing against Keenspot half a decade ago, they used a subscription model for allowing people access to a comic’s archives. Unfortunately, the subscription model didn’t work very well. Only a couple thousand people subscribed to MT (and to the little baby-Tales that Manley spawned from his parent company). People weren’t willing to spend $3 a month to have access to dozens of comics archives.

Not when there were thousands of comics already available for free on the web.

In order to defeat the illegal downloads, Marvel, DC and the other companies have to beat the downloaders at their own game. What is the benefit of a print copy? Being able to bring it wherever you are, without needing internet or power (light is optional but useful, but often free anyway).

Now, print compilations are actually cheaper per-page than the little 22-page-mags that come off the stands. The problem is that the overall cost is higher, so you need an existing audience willing to purchase the product.

Remember my example of Studio Foglio? The Foglios were in significant financial difficulty with their flagship title, Girl Genius. It was dragging them under. When they moved to the internet and started showcasing their comic for free… they increased their readership tenfold. But more, they found a significant portion of their audience was willing and interested in buying their comic (and other products). They actually sold out of back-stock comics. They pulled out of debt (for the most part). Girl Genius is a success story in the comic world, both on-line and off-line.

So, why hasn’t Marvel and DC done something similar? They’ve launched entire worlds in the past, let them run their course, and then shut down the print run afterward. Why not do something like that online? What is Marvel so afraid of?

If it worked (and it would)… it would change the face of comics forever. The 22-page overpriced mags would become the minority. Professionally-designed-and-produced strips could draw in hundreds of thousands of readers, if not millions. If 10% of those people purchase print compilations, it’s still more than what most print runs get in terms of sales. If 1% purchased the print compilations it would still be on par with the low-end print runs. And it would kill the illegal download business.

Why download illegally when it’s already available online for free? And what’s more, with the use of online advertising (such as the Project Wonderful advertising program currently in use by a growing number of webcomics) Marvel could make money off of advertising revenues while showcasing their comics.

And again there’d be no point in illegally copying a print compilation as it’s available online. Marvel (and other companies that follow this business path) would cut printing costs, increase readership, and establish a presence online that would have tremendous marketing potential.

Robert A. Howard, Tangents Webcomic Reviews
http://www.tangents.us

“If someone can explain to me how downloading a scanned comic is wrong whereas borrowing a comic from the library is somehow Okay, then maybe they’ll have a leg to stand on, but until comic publishers, music distributors, home video distributors and book publishers start to crack down on libraries, then they’ll have no legs to stand on.”

Library activities are not illegal because they are covered by an explicit statutory exception to the Copyright Act. Further, lending from a library is within the original purpose of the Copyright Laws- promoting the arts and knowledge, whereas downloading illegally is commercial in nature in that it deprives artists and writers of the compensation to which they are entitled.

Speaking for myself, the biggest problem with digital downloads is the prices of printed comic media these days. You can argue that the creative talents that create them need to make a living and I won’t disagree with you one bit, but while the over-all price has gone up, up, and away in the past decade and a half, the quality (plots and creativity) have been dropping; charging more for less…

Get rid of the gimmick covers and marketing crossovers; nurture real plot and character content; lower the prices by getting rid of the overhead costs of publishing gimmicks and I think the loyalty will return. Create a cheap product and you get cheap customers…

Given a choice I would download a comic to see if it’s worth the price and buy it if it is a quality piece of work to support my favorite talents.

Remember the days of Jack “The King” Kirby and Jim Steranko; no gimmicks, superb art and fantastic stories have created loyalties that continue to this day.

Frankly, we don’t know, and I certainly won’t jump to any conclusions.