Do free webcomics hurt the industry?

[Cavechan]

If I want to read ‘One Piece’ by Oda I have to pay in order to get it.

Well now you don't even have to do that really since the WSJ app has the latest three chapters for free! Then it's only two bucks if you want access to the archive (for that and a bunch of other series).

And yeah I don't think free stuff hurts the industry at all.

[Flauschwurm]

There are different reasons for wanting to publish a comic.

a lot of people, especially beginners and first time publishers, could not in their mind justify a price tag on a project that is just a hobby/passion project, or they don't feel comfortable about charging money for their project YET since no one knows what it's about, they're not at the right skill level etc.

I whole-heartedly agree with @bear1, the industry has no right to blame Indie Comic artists for a problem they brought over themselves.

People who have always bought comics will continue to buy comics, people who will read free indie comics will aways read free indie comics. They're not quite the same target audience to begin with.

The only thing that REALLY hurts the "professional" comic industry is piracy. Thats the real problem. Not indie comics.

[Darth_Biomech]

The only thing that REALLY hurts the "professional" comic industry is piracy. Thats the real problem. Not indie comics.

Even that is debatable since it doesn't really hurt the movie or game industries, despite their cries about how they suffer from people torrenting stuff they wouldn't buy otherwise anyway. And some gamedevs even upload their games to torrents themselves.

[malwdark]

Sad truth is people don't want to pay for unknown artist's content :`D so of course big productors won't loose sells because a pair of teens uploaded their own comic to the internet. The hurtful free work is the one done for others, like if you draw a free logo or free comic for a bussiness.
(I sell my webcomic on paper btw, but only the spanish version)

[Flauschwurm]

yet comic industry works entirely different to movie/game industry :'3

Movies already make HEAPS of money with cinema releases. a cinema experience is sth you can't pirate.

Games make HEAPS of money on their release day as there is the biggest hype around the games and everyone wants to play it on day 1, where there is no pirated copy available.

Now, with comics, you usually very very quickly get pirated versions of a comic or manga as soon as it's released, which is why you virtually have no waiting time to get a pirated comic version, different to movie or games. And that is the big difference imo - that they make huge loss from beginning on, not after the big hype is over.

This is especially true with Manga where you HAVE to stay up to date to avoid spoilers, yet you cant wait to buy a legal translated version, since it can take YEARS till they are released.

[Darth_Biomech]

yet you cant wait to buy a legal translated version, since it can take YEARS till they are released.

I think you meant "if they are released"? 99.9% of the existing manga was never officially picked up in my country for example. Only the most popular out of the most popular got their legal reprints, and it doesn't even cover all of the must-read classics.

but the question is, is it still evil to support piracy in these cases.

[franzvanderlinde]

Sigh... Does public libraries hurt the industry? Does someone decide not to buy quality comics in order to read free online ones? Does reading a free comic fill your belly so you are no longer hungry and then won't buy those for sale? There are so many points being missed really... I can't judge by the quote, but the person probably has zero knowledge of the industry and want to make money without having as much quality. Guess what, people won't pay for low quality comics even if there were no free ones.

[Dane_Sherbet]

Just because an industry exists doesn't mean it always did or always will. They rise and fall, is what I mean, and it's never up to just one person. Neither is it necessarily good or bad.

For example, the music industry exists because of certain technologies and distribution networks. Long before they existed, people made their own music. They still do, but people in general used to be better at it when it was the only option. When did it become an industry? Maybe when the first specialists -- bards and minstrels -- appeared. Maybe when instrument-making became a legitimate trade. Maybe when opera became a big business, or maybe when sheet music did. That's around the time that music piracy became a thing.

But people never stopped being able to make their own music, and maybe it's better that way, even if it seems like we've passed the era of the music superstar. Similarly, maybe the comic scene is better for the direction it's been heading. It's never been easier to get into comics, or to find series that truly resonate with you. That might be more important for society than whether a relative handful of people can still make a living doing comics.

[writercynknapp]

No, it makes the industry more vibrant and inclusive. The new content brings the newest readers. It can reduce the monetization mechanisms, but those mechanisms are already under pressure from stealing copycats as it is.

[nauko]

If it's a hobby and the things artists are posting is not in response to any request I don't see the problem in posting it online without charging for it. The person you quoted is putting unnecessary pressure on hobbies that are easier to profit on and involve public interaction. There are fishers who fish to blow off steam and have no intention of selling what they caught to a fish market, should they be reprimanded for that? Same for hikers that hike, crocheters that crochet sweaters and scarves and stuff, are we going to reprimand them too because they didn't figure out a way to make their hobby profitable?

It's like telling artists and musicians that if they want to do it as a hobby, fine, but for the sake of people who want to profit off it, they should be doing it in private and not post on social media their achievements which is kind of annoying. I hate to say it but getting love from a community is a major ego boost and is partially responsible for giving an artist the confidence to improve and strive for higher goals in their work, even if one of those higher goals never is money-making.

Why should hobbyist artists/musicians/writers/etc. have to give that up to make artists who want money more secure about their money making ability? If they are a pro with money-making abilities they will find a way.

It feels like this person is making excuses tbh.

[domisotto]

Doing things just because you enjoy them is obviously isn't wrong or bad, but I still can't shake off feeling that there's some truth in it - free stuff does hurt people who want to make living out of it. Especially if it's objectively good stuff.

Oh, gosh, I had an excellent quote about free writers on the net from a published one. It was full of empathy and compassion for all of us who just want someone--anyone--even if that's just one person to see what we write.

The bottom line is that people who can make money of their creative work are very few. The rest of us are happy with just sharing it and finding a few readers here and there. It's our destiny, and if we didn't have that option, we would be worse off.

Honestly, people who can make money off their work, and are not making enough for their liking... well, maybe it's not the fault of the poor shmucks who are happy to just share and get a couple of reads. It's like an pro footballer or something complaining that locals playing in the schoolyard is stealing their thunder. We are in a different leagues, people.

[kitschensyngk]

I think that if you go into comics or any art medium just to make money, then you're doing it for the wrong reason.

Some people make comics because they enjoy them. Some people make comics because they want people to read them.

Sure, people dream of making a living off their creations, and I admit I'm one of them, but where is the heart and soul in creating something for no other reason than monetary gain?

[NickRowler]

If people in the comic industry think like this, that is really messed up.

I feel like the majority paid American comics have been mostly limited to super hero comics with maybe a few franchise tie in comics for kids. Getting your foot un the door if your work doesn’t fall into these two categories is extremely difficult. So getting mad at free webcomics, especially ones that fall under romance or BL, sounds more like a company not understanding that the issue isn’t indie comics, it’s them becoming so limited that people are going to take alternative routes to publish their work. People who do care about a comic are willing to pay for it or support the creator in other ways like through Patron or buying merch.

[Phantomlight]

I agree with a lot of other people on here.
I want to add something:

A lot of factors can hurt the industry, but nothing has more power, I think, than the consumers. The market is swayed by consumers, we continue to see this time and time again when there's something that consumers make popular, many different industries will try to appeal to that. References in movies of popular internet trends for instance. The Emoji Movie, for example. The things that are gaining popularity has a lot to do with the consumers. If it can make money, it will be created, it will be milked for all its worth.

So, I think the mindset of consumers is what can harm the industry. But again, the blame doesn't just fall on a single group, like I said there's many factors. The industry doesn't have to be swayed by the consumer, but it chooses to because that's a very safe monetary route.

And, I mean, it does harm individual creators (of any kind!) that a consumer has that kind of mindset that they want things for free, which I would say could be considered as entitlement. Because not every consumer has this mindset, I could say it has to do with the individual. I mean, there are some individuals that try to get free stuff everywhere. And then there are other consumers that will by anything and everything from their favorite works. Others that just buy a few things. Others still that don't buy anything at all just because they can't afford it (should they also be to blame? I don't think so) If people want to buy, that's their choice. If they don't want to buy, that's their choice too. Everyone has their reasons.

[But_a_Jape]

(brushes dust off of unused Economics degree)
...
(quietly puts it back as he realizes it doesn't magically return lost knowledge from 6 years ago)

Anyway, short answer is no. Long answer: the fault in the quoted person's reasoning is that art is not a conventional economic good like, say, wheat or corn, which are generic, interchangeable goods. You can reasonably determine how valuable a pound of wheat is relative to a pound of corn, and once you determine that you can easily say "I'll exchange x amount of wheat for x amount of corn."

Art, including comics, does not function this same way. Every piece of art is unique, subjective in its value, and infinitely varied (there are countless ways any one piece of art can be different from another). As such, you can't just say a free piece of art can replace one you need to pay for - they will offer you two completely different experiences and the exchange rate between the two is practically impossible to determine. The only time this wouldn't be the case would be in regards to plagiarism or other intellectual theft, which is its own domain and has legal protections to avoid damage to an artist who charges for their work.

[Phantomlight]

I love when someone who has studied a topic in depth joins into a discussion relating to that topic. They can offer an input that may be missing from others who may know bits and pieces or the basics of said topic.

[Dane_Sherbet]

The demand for entertainment seems fairly consistent though. And if free entertainment satisfies more and more of that demand, then of course people will be spending less money on paid entertainment.

[domisotto]

It doesn't really happen though, at least with novels.

Finding someone to read your free book is really hard, and when a story gains traction, it (and the author) gets into the paid circles one way or another.

What remains free is usually niche materials, out-of-touch or subpar quality stuff that the publishing industry cannot make profitable anyway. At least with writing, a novel became a social skill, like poetry in Song China. Most people who write for free never achieve significant readership, it is more of a companionable occupation and skill honing with some unrealized aspiration to sell a novel.

Should we tell everyone to man up and only go to the agents & forbid everyone to post their raw or rejected stuff for free, it will have zero impact on the book market.

[Dane_Sherbet]

I'm not in any way discouraging people from posting their stuff online. It's pretty good when I can scratch that comic itch for nothing. And a lot of the stuff out there is good and professional-quality.

[Legendofgenii]

I love everything you just said.