cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/questions/p/1330162/why-do-american-authors-who-advocate-for-noble-causes-keep-their-books-behind-paywalls-i
That one thing that keeps puzzling me.
it feels weird when an American author keep giving media interviews talking about the cause they are advocating for and keep referencing their paywalled book.
Why do they not at least release the book for free after say a certain period(say 3 months) to advance their cause beyond their existence.
I had seen this phenomenon with American politicians, people important in technology and even feminists and social advocates.
Why?
It is, but being one who grew up when the OG Napster was a thing I came to look at intangible things in a different way. Replication of data is inevitable, people have been doing it since we first learned to communicate, so trying to perpetually fight it ends up just causing people on both sides grief in the end.
One of the first I recall to use the model I mentioned was Nine Inch Nails and the ‘Ghosts’ album, a novel concept at the time that seems to have been a lot more accepted in recent years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghosts_I–IV
There is perhaps a balance. I recently watched a video about the R4 DS card that allowed for an immense amount of piracy that killed off a shit ton of studios in the process. So maybe a time delay is probably best rather than forever paywall something.
The majority of people who would purchase the product wouldn’t really wait. Only after a certain period after release does it make sense to make it public and not require people to pirate. Then again I would imagine that only works with large/popular releases, not so much the smaller creators who would want to make any kind of money they could regardless of the timescale (which is the majority of whom I think the OP is talking about)