[We asked Raph Koster, an expert on virtual worlds, to comment on the recent controversy at Second Life. He writes a popular blog at http://www.raphkoster.com]
In the last month something happened that shook the world to its core. It was the sudden appearance of the capability to instantly replicate three-dimensional objects, suddenly in the hands of the common people. Everyone’s intellectual property was up for grabs, and the very notion of manufacturing under attack. Small business owners who relied on handcrafting luxury goods found themselves completely vulnerable to perfect knockoffs.
These events, of course, happened within Second Life, not in the real world: a virtual place, not a physical place, suffered these upheavals. But this isn’t an article about Second Life • it’s an article about culture clash, and the lessons of these events reverberate across industries and worlds alike.
SL is, of course, a virtual world on the Internet, which users can connect to. It is noted for its devotion to idealistic cyberlibertarian propositions: that users should own the content they upload, that everything in the world should be user-generated rather than broadcast from a monolithic content creation factory, and that virtual worlds are places for business and culture, not just games. It embodies many of the notions of cyberspace and metaverse, and the notions that “code is law” and “information wants to be free” are in its very bone and sinew.
Its users, however, are increasingly mainstream, and they make their living creating content: they make their virtual living off of creating the very content that the hacker ethic assumes will be free. They make use of the “copy permissions” system that serves as Second Life’s virtual stand-in for IP law, essentially embracing the notion of DRM within their cyberlibertarian’s world. This form of microtransaction-based virtual business has become a core approach to monetizing all sorts of online communities: it is the blood that animates the technological body.
Then came CopyBot, a tool to replicate virtual objects that bypassed the permissions system, choosing instead to scrape its data directly from the data stream. It was the equivalent of an “analog hole” for digital assets. And suddenly, it wasn’t large media conglomerates feeling the pinch of IP theft • it was ordinary people struggling to make a virtual buck.
Why does this matter? In the last decades, we have seen the content business have to adapt to a frightening new reality: The cost to create a minute of content has risen exponentially, but the fair market value of a minute of content has plummeted. In our brave new world of digital assets and user contributions, we tend to forget that this will be hitting not just media companies in the pocketbook, but also all those Web users who are merrily uploading their creations to platforms that by their very nature are fundamentally defenseless against copying.
Microtransactions for digital assets and virtual goods is a rising, potentially multibillion dollar industry. To succeed, entrepreneurs who are building networked systems based on user content (be they citizens of Second Life or the makers of virtual worlds themselves) must realize that anything displayable is copyable; the value lies instead in service and in server-side functionality. Content is like songs around a campfire: destined to be enjoyed for free. Those who build businesses around hosting campfires would be wise to focus on making the campfire experience great, rather than charging listeners by the song.
14 Comments
-
csven said:
I don’t expect Raph to say it, but I suspect he knows I will.
“Why does this matter?”
This matters not just because of the impact on virtual worlds and intangible content, but because that digital data is effectively no different than the information we use when manufacturing tangible goods. Rapid manufacturing is on the horizon and it too will be vulnerable to the same issues that face the virtual world.
-
Nicholas said:
in what way has the cost to create a minute of content risen exponentially?
i would suggest that the cost has not risen exponentially — has not, in fact, risen at all — it has _fallen_, mostly due to technology (examples include blog platforms, video editing software, digital cameras, software synthesizers, digital audio devices, etc. etc.)
there is still an argument that the marginal value of a minute of content is falling even _faster_ than the cost of creation — I think it is a decent argument, in fact — but on the face of it, the key statement in this article seems to cry out for a revision…
-
Raph said:
While the cost to create amateur content has fallen, the cost to create professional content has risen dramatically in all audiovisual fields. In computer graphics, film, television, audio recording, and so on, the costs to create mainstream mass market entertainment content is quite a lot higher than it used to be. And that’s the sort of content we’re talking about when we’re talking about “the content business.”
Even in the amateur market, there’s a quality arms race. The new tools and platforms are never going to be closed to the amateur, but as the more moneyed creators move onto those platforms (like pro filmmakers moving onto YouTube) you see that they are radically outspending the lone amateur — and reaping the rewards. Most hot viral clips are professionally produced these days, even if only by film students — Helsinki complainers, Eric Mongrain concert footage, etc.
-
kim said:
Agreed with Raph.
Nicholas, there’s another variable to consider. The cost may be falling for a given quality level of content, but the market expectations of quality are rising rapidly. The consumer wants much better, and expects to pay less for it.
Add that to Raph’s point about this being rapidly commoditized and it’s a scary picture.
-
csven said:
I’d add that creating virtual world 3D content usually requires tools still far more complex than “blog platforms, video editing software, digital cameras, software synthesizers, digital audio devices”. Writing or capturing media (images/sounds) is usually much less time-intensive than creating from scratch; the difference between photographing a person and painting them realistically.
The big change in 3D has been SketchUp, but professional modelers creating highend content (which approaches CAD complexity; especially when generating models for the various displacement mapping techniques) still use Max/Maya/SoftImage. SketchUp isn’t even close. Those apps have *not* gotten simpler to use. In fact, the additions of features have made them more complex in some ways (and has opened up the market for more specialized apps like Modo).
And as Raph said, those professional tools do land in the hands of amateurs, but those with talent (and patience) go professional and those without stay amateur (or run out of patience). Most people won’t spare the time to learn to paint like da Vinci if there’s a camera handy. And if it were fast and easy, then the game industry wouldn’t be so eager to see how “Spore” - with it’s procedural system - works out. Procedurals should help, as might some other things like 3D scanning, but they’re not likely to solve every content-creation issue facing virtual world builders.
-
Nicholas said:
guys, I think that the cost to make a professional =videogame= may have increased exponentially over the years — but it just isn:t true in other media.
-
Prokofy Neva said:
Raph, there’s a number of flaws in the concept of the historical event that shook the world:
“It was the sudden appearance of the capability to instantly replicate three-dimensional objects, suddenly in the hands of the common people.”
No, the “common man” did not gain CopyBot and still doesn’t have CopyBot. The makers of CopyBot were in a select, privileged group of reverse engineers sanctioned by Linden Lab even in spite of their own TOS restrictions on reverse-engineering. These few reverse engineers decided to release the device into the world with malicious intent, as the released chat logs of their discussion of the creation and release revealed; the founder of libsecondlife also connived to sell the CopyBot itself for a high price through an alt, and also paid a source to deliberately mislead journalists about the complicity involved in CopyBot. There’s no “common man” in this equation.
Indeed, any “common man” who happened to buy a CopyBot quickly found themselves getting a warning of banning as the Lindens moved to make ‘unauthorized use’ (not well defined) a TOS violation.
“Everyone’s intellectual property was up for grabs, and the very notion of manufacturing under attack.”
Not quite the case, but let’s accept that for argument’s sake (prim shoes were easier to copy than textures which didn’t render as well evidently; actual hard cases of actual theft *and* re-sale haven’t really emerged yet).
However…one thing remained uncopyable! Scripts! Now why are you not surprised?!
>Small business owners who relied on handcrafting luxury goods found themselves completely vulnerable to perfect knockoffs.
Yes, and in one fell swoop, the Lindens, through their designated reverse engineers that they had let loose to crowdsource solutions to bugs and finding improved client someday, undid their nation of shopkeepers and landlords (because landlords can’t expect to sell or rent land for stores or mall space to people struck immobile with fear of CopyBot).
I suppose it’s a tribute to human persistence in its suspension of disbelief and it’s ability to withstand even huge blows like this that life goes on, most people keep making, selling, buying, renting with no big discernible whack to the economy. The geeky stuff you’d need to know to work CopyBot; the sanctions the Lindens now have put in place (weak, and mainly rhetorical) have at least reinforced the sagging social contract.
Of course, the lesson is not lost on some giant content creators who will likely fold their tents or change their business models in the coming year. The winners of CopyBot are third-party shopping sites who take commissions or advertising and can now ensure a tamper-free container for people to sell their goods. To be sure, the owner of those goods is still vulnerable to CopyBot and that ultimately erodes the IP of the sellers, but it’s one break on the flow. There will be others. Big companies will just sell subscriptions to enter servers where they have rich content produced daily by scores of programmers and designers who don’t care about IP; they aren’t paid in micropayments, but paid by normal checks even coming in snail-mail — the companies who commission this content production will view the arranged bytes as little different than the arranged Legos or Tinker Toys you make into a car or house — then topple when you are bored.
Linden Lab will sell the Tinker Toys or Legos or access to the creation of them, to be more literal; the big companies will sell the rights to enter servers and view and play with them; there will be less and less “commodities” made by independent actors unless they have RL lawywers and RL patents.
-
Raph said:
Nicholas, I recommend reading “The Big Picture” for an illustration of how costs in the film industry have risen over time. The picture in the music industry is similar.
Don’t get confused by the explosion of cheap and easy to use tools for indies. It’s absolutely true that the barriers have gotten lower and lower for new entrants into the industry. For example, musicians can now set up a home recording studio superior to what the Beatles had by getting a computer and ACiD, Audacity, Garage Band, etc.
However, the cost of a pro-level setup is in the tens of thousands of dollars. A single rackmount soundbank can run to well over $1000.
So yes, while the low end has proliferated, the high end has continued to get fancier and more expensive.
-
Nicholas said:
thanks for the tips!
-
dmx said:
I’ll repeat a comment I made over on Ralphs blog, because it appears the conversation lives over here. Consider this a heresy:
——————-
I actually think copybot is the best thing that could happen to SL.
The problem with SL, is that its utterly gripped by what bugs me abour RL. Socially constructed limits to subjectivity based on wealth. “I’d love to be a hoverboat owner, but I cant afford itâ€. Well, in my take It’d be nice to be able to drop into a virtual world and hoon about in a hoverboat, but damn it if I cant afford to in SL either.
Of course I *used* to be able to go;-
@create hoverboat
And in the old currencyless Mush’s I could go “Yo, queegle, copy me your battlefrog and we’ll go nuts on each otherâ€.
Richard Stallman talks alot about distopia for him being a world based on intellectual property, and whilst RL is not quite there.
And I got to be honest, I think its going to strangle the hell out of the game. Currently theres alot of discontent within SL about the intrusion of the corporates into the game. I dont blame its residents. Walking around and seeing boring IBM and NISSAN signs plastered everywhere seems to invoke everything negative about baudrilares (spelling?) hyperreal I can think of. But the growing distopia in SL is a creation of the culture of the place itself. Talking about building librarys of open source items and whatnot can draw looks of almost horror out of residents “You’ll undercut my market!†and so on. Im tempted to reply “Well, why isnt that a bad thing. Its a game, and more stuff means more funâ€, but then I remember that many of these poor sods are attempting to actually make a living in it. Its like some sort of bizare categorical error made intentional. Well of course IBM and NISSAN will turn up. Theres a buck to be made. But wheres the fun?
Now, I dont necessarily disaprove of ingame currency. Heck, eve online is my favorite game by a mile, and the buck rules the show there. But the core undercurrent is NOT “If I move x widgets, I can trade my lindenbux for realbux†, its “man, if I pwn the band of brothers I can wave my doodle around in 3D and be the he-man I dreamed of as a childâ€.
But I can imagine a 3d world that isnt shooty, but more social buildy, and frankly Im more inclined to imagine that as one based on a set of freedoms that precludes exploitation and constraint by wealth and intellectual property.
Well, I really hope copybot succeeds and forces some freedom into that game , because frankly if online world makers might get the idea that SL’s monetisation of fun really is a good idea.
Only the cyberpunks will save us now!
————–Now. Onto Prokovsky’s comments;-
The “select elite” you refer to is infact an open source developer group that got somewhat insanely hounded by certain questionable members of the SL community for doing something I consider really really admirable. Put in free labour into creating an open source product that lets people interface into the SL world outside of the proprietry SL client.
You’ve been hammering on about the “evil intent” stuff, by virtue of a little IRC chat, that only appears to show geek humor at worst. You keep painting the quest for freedom programmers engage in against proprietry enclosure of human creativity as if its some sort of communist plot.
The curse of SL is its DRM system. Information *wants* to be free, and the stunning lack of creativity I frankly see in SL compared to the amazing mushes and Muds of old really seem to have everything to do with the distopian system of intelectual property built in to Linden Labs software. I mean, one walks about SL and its like freaking suburbia. Hurr! Look I made my house!
SL needs a few things to do before it can flower in to the place it should be. First off stop stifling creativity with this stupid IP system. If I see a car and think “Man that’d be awesome with a pair of crazy wings and a pair of mech legs”, then it’d nice to be able to copy it and modify.
This is the reason that one of the most productive areas of IT innovation is in Open Source.
It worries me that the most creative forces in SL get stigmatised and attacked. I can think of the insanely creative builds of W-Hat, the libsecondlife people , and many others (perhaps the furries?) , that get treated like outside wierdo’s and bandits, whereas SL seems to portray greasy business folks who seem keen on forcing people to pay real money (that could do stuff like , say, buy food) for innane replicas of junk on the outside world.
Buggered if I want to buy another cheezy mansion model, I want to steal your car and attach an a jumpjet to fly to the moon.
-
dmx said:
Argh. Sorry about my grammar and unfinished sentences.. I get fast-typey-no-reading when Im irate.
-
wzljc said:
Make $300 per day!
It is true. come to my blog
http://wzljc2002.blogspot.com/ -
BESTREFINANCEMORT said:
It’s the bills at the end of the month, the Tar Baby
-
Create Your Star Wars Legos 2 The Video Game said:
Great, aonther post about lego. Thanks, I\’d nearly forgotten about it.
14 Trackbacks
10:32 pm
Second Life - Coffee with Rex Dixon #5 « Technically Speaking said:
[...] Once again, everyone now is on the side of where Coffee with Rex Dixon #5 already was over a week ago when the show was recorded. Mr. Business Golf and Rex Dixon discussed this as our main topic of discussion. People are like sheep sometimes; Technically Speaking, and Rex Dixon and Mr. Business Golf seem to always be one step ahead! [...]
10:47 am
Raph’s Website » CopyBot Redux, over on VentureBeat said:
[...] Matt Marshall of VentureBeat asked me to write a brief article on the CopyBot thing, and here it is: Investing time and money in virtual worlds: Caveat Emptor. [...]
8:15 pm
Clockwork Rhino » Raph Koster on Content said:
[...] Raph Koster wrote a short article for Venture Beat Contributors, on investing time and money in virtual worlds. It’s a good read, but not what I want to focus on. Instead, I’d like to pick out a quote which makes developers cringe: In the last decades, we have seen the content business have to adapt to a frightening new reality: The cost to create a minute of content has risen exponentially, but the fair market value of a minute of content has plummeted. [...]
1:12 am
Ymerce » Blog Archive » Ook overvloed in virtuele werelden said:
[...] Wijze woorden van Raph Koster over de recente gebeurtenissen in Second Life. Ook Second Life zal zich moeten onderwerpen aan het getal 0. “Microtransactions for digital assets and virtual goods is a rising, potentially multibillion dollar industry. To succeed, entrepreneurs who are building networked systems based on user content (be they citizens of Second Life or the makers of virtual worlds themselves) must realize that anything displayable is copyable; the value lies instead in service and in server-side functionality. Content is like songs around a campfire: destined to be enjoyed for free. Those who build businesses around hosting campfires would be wise to focus on making the campfire experience great, rather than charging listeners by the song.” [...]
7:21 am
Deep Jive Interests » When Someone Else Creates Reality, YES — That’s A Business “Risk” said:
[...] When Someone Else Creates Reality, YES — That’s A Business “Risk” November 24th, 2006 at 9:16 am by Tony So, the snarky amongst us rejoinder “but who really has any control over anything?”, to which I would swiftly apply a boot to the head. Second Life, the most successful “Virtual” world with a “real” economy is fascinating in many aspects – the most of which is how many companies are taking this so seriously. What with the Interwebs evolving so “fast”, and this all being so “new”, I would be interested to know what a real economics nut has to say about the whole issue of a virtual economy where software can be written to copy virtual goods. [...]
5:06 pm
Darren Herman » Blog Archive » Ralph Koster’s Article on Virtual Worlds said:
[...] While I wont summarize the article as it can be found here, I will paraphrase something that Ralph nails on the head: [...]
7:22 pm
» Links for 25-11-2006 » Velcro City Tourist Board » Blog Archive said:
[...] 15 - Investing time and money in virtual worlds: Caveat Emptor “In the last decades, we have seen the content business have to adapt to a frightening new reality: The cost to create a minute of content has risen exponentially, but the fair market value of a minute of content has plummeted.” Raph Koster. (tags: industry content market metaverse innovation economy copyright CopyBot reality virtual worlds synthetic Life Second) [...]
11:53 pm
Raph’s Website » Are microtransactions actually the future? said:
[...] In a comment here on the VentureBeat article I wrote, Steven Davis stated, I was with you until your final comments. Outside the US, MMOs/online games are moving to a Virtual Asset Purchase model. They are selling you the songs while sitting by the campfire is free (though you don’t get many songs until you pay, to strain your metaphor). Second Life should be the same. Where they have run into trouble is that they do not manage “song creation†/ virtual asset creation by their players well so their DRM system is not effective - and has begun to undermine the player-driven economy. Whether it is possible to do so in a system like Second Life is a subject of a different discussion, but “song sales†seem to be growing rapidly as the business model (according to Gamasutra, microtransactions now drive about 50% of the Korean online game industry). [...]
5:57 am
Investing time and money in virtual worlds: Caveat Emptor at Basement Tapes said:
[...] Venture Beat Contributors » Investing time and money in virtual worlds: Caveat Emptor [...]
6:56 am
Anne 2.0 » Blog Archive » links for 2006-11-24 said:
[...] Venture Beat Contributors » Investing time and money in virtual worlds: Caveat Emptor “Those who build businesses around hosting campfires would be wise to focus on making the campfire experience great, rather than charging listeners by the song.” (tags: drm secondlife virtualworlds copybot) [...]
12:28 pm
VentureBeat » Susan Wu, the first virtual venture capitalist, blogs said:
[...] That’s a dangerous thing, given the “copybot” that riled the Second Life community, going through the site and copying things to remind people that virtual stuff is essentially worthless (see the VentureBeat column by Raph Koster). [...]
4:00 pm
Diversion Media Weblog » Blog Archive » Are Content Costs Rising Exponentially? said:
[...] I like Raph Koster, too — at least, I like the work he’s done, and I even like most of his recent essay about SecondLife’s copybot woes. [...]
3:29 pm
…a running commentary… » Let’s not be that naive… said:
[...] link: http://www.venturebeat.com/contributors/2006/11/22/investing-time-and-money-in-virtual-worlds-caveat-emptor/ [...]
6:55 am
Out to Pasture » Blog Archive » Metaverse DRM said:
[...] made the rounds of the blog-o-twitter-o-sphere a couple of weeks ago. I also remember Raph’s perceptive comments on this topic back in 2006 when Second Life was hit by the Copybot [...]