"The product itself _is_ the set of copyable bits, and this _is_ scarcity-free, due to having zero marginal cost of production."
It doesn't have a $0 cost of production. Did it cost Microsoft $0 to develop windows?
"The best possible solution to piracy is to _ignore_ it, and focus on identifying your actual paying customers and developing products for them."
I disagree. While it is good to focus on paying customers, if an industry ignores it, they will quickly put themselves out of a job.
"But don't waste your talent, time, and energy trying to fight a Quixotic battle against a macro-level phenomenon that you have no actual control over."
It's the people that want free stuff that are trying to tell me I have no control over it. I know for sure that adding copy protection for software increases sales.
The other issue is with search engines like Google. If the pirates get organic keywords that are higher than a legitimate source and offer the same thing for free, many users will go to the illegitimate source and never purchase.
It's okay though. With the Internet getting faster and cheaper, I see most software apps going to a service eventually.
The cost of development is a capital investment, not a production cost. You may or may not recover that investment, depending upon a whole host of variables, most of which you will have no direct control over, presuming you even recognize their existence.
Software does have zero marginal cost of production, so someone making an illegal copy of your software does not create any actual cost for you in the way that someone stealing your physical inventory would. So the impact of an individual using a pirated copy of your software is the same as that individual not buying your software for any other reason. The macro-level impact of piracy is the same as the impact of any other macro-level factor that discourages people from buying your product, e.g. a competitor offering an equivalent or better product at a lower price point.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't assert your copyright in the face of brazen piracy. But the best way to earn your ROI for developing the product is to maximize the value that it creates, and thereby maximize the number of people who will willingly pay for your product. Focusing on pirates, who are manifestly unwilling to pay you, is a dead-end. Spending money on DRM is a waste of capital that could be used to improve the product and attract more paying customers.
It doesn't have a $0 cost of production. Did it cost Microsoft $0 to develop windows?
"The best possible solution to piracy is to _ignore_ it, and focus on identifying your actual paying customers and developing products for them."
I disagree. While it is good to focus on paying customers, if an industry ignores it, they will quickly put themselves out of a job.
"But don't waste your talent, time, and energy trying to fight a Quixotic battle against a macro-level phenomenon that you have no actual control over."
It's the people that want free stuff that are trying to tell me I have no control over it. I know for sure that adding copy protection for software increases sales.
The other issue is with search engines like Google. If the pirates get organic keywords that are higher than a legitimate source and offer the same thing for free, many users will go to the illegitimate source and never purchase.
It's okay though. With the Internet getting faster and cheaper, I see most software apps going to a service eventually.