If it's impossible for an independent company to replicate an existing service or product
it creates potential for consumers to be abused or offered a second rate product indefinitely.
Tl;DR Never let business be immune to replication
This is why every single service or product on this thumbnail have
had awful reps from their consumers for years yet havn't changed or been replaced.
Cause If you earn extra abusing your consumers a new company can just not
and still make bank taking all your customers. Unless it's impossible.
This is how we made it impossible for new companies to appear for each of these services.
For Insulin its patents. 3 companies each have active
patents that cover one or two of the 4 known types of modern insulin essential for type 1 diabetes.
And it doesn't get any more impossible to replicate than literally illegal.
And while the original patents have expired, new patents that cover new formulations and
advancements have so little difference with original, that replicators of the original
are still liable for patent infringement. Which you can tell cause companies trying to make
their own insulin like the Open Insulin Project and Lannett are specifically trying to make and
approve a "bio-similar" not a bio-replicate, a generic, which is easier to get approved.
Until we make a one, the big 3 price fix and there are big million view videos showing the patents,
companies and price fixing they're involved in but none mention price fixing cartels don't
work unless you prevent replication. All you've done is create an incentive
for new companies, and the cartel stops being profitable if invite them all in.
Now outside America, governments set prices, which... works...?
But its treating the symptom not the cause, this aint isolated.
Printers! With 8 million views worth of complaints about insane ink mark ups,
chips that waste ink by design and countless others, every knows this one. They say its
due to the "Razor and blades model" but razors don't have this abuse.
In truth modern inkjet printers have 4 essential parts and each is patented by a different company.
Used to be a ton of companies trying to invent it and patenting each part
as they went but these 4 made the essentials so they shared them, but only with each other.
It's a cartel, same as insulin. IEEE did a report on the details, but this is why
you can't find inkjet printers from anyone other than Canon, Epson, Hp or Brother, try googling
it. Even big tech companies like Samsung, despite investing in laser printers, don't make inkjet.
In contrast, laser printers didn't have these essentials and could be better replicated,
that’s why dozens of companies make them and
"I'm only going to be hating on inkjet printers like this one. Laser printers get a pass."
Less potential abuse
Finally, Adobe!
"jacking up the price. Or the slew of new bugs,
every. single. major. update. its that you just. don't. listen."
Photoshop was the first of its kind and first to start patenting features,
and they've been patenting ever since.
Photoshop can select a subject in the foreground
with one click. Others do it slower cause they can't use this method, its patented.
An image snapping to the centre or border of the screen or other image?
patented. Others don't have it
Font matches, the face mesh liquify feature,
a bunch of advance methods for deblurring, all patented
Even things like smart objects and blurring tools
like the iris lens that seem like they're replicated always have a
bit less function they've been missing for YEARS, cause they legally HAVE to.
All this ensures photoshop always has more and better features than other graphics programs,
but also it forces many customers to more adobe products to keep production efficient as all their
products integrate with it to save huge time. Pros trying to quit say just that
"The way that Adobe's apps dynamically link with each other
drastically cuts down on the time that you would otherwise spend:
Saving, exporting, editing, and then importing your files between your apps."
And these are just the easiest cases to show what replication immunity can do,
many companies have thousands of patents, who knows what else you're being abused on.
Apple signed over 2,000 patents in 2018 ALONE. do you see a correlation yet?
Whatever next, streaming services and game platforms like Disney+ and the
Epic Game Store. Infamous for pricing and bad service but, most vexing, one cheap,
easy app had its content split onto more services for more money and less convenience.
But big food brands don't leave shelves to make their own stores. The popular store
would just replicate what it lost. Unless you’re a restaurant which has
to sign an exclusivity deal to buy a drink dispenser cause they're *censored* PATENTED
And streaming services can't replicate what they lose either. Not Cause patents but copyright.
The content's illegal to replicate. So when streaming proved successful,
Disney tore it's copyrighted content from Netflix to sell exclusively on their own cause they knew
customers couldn't go to the most cheap and convenient service for certain shows
or movies anymore. And every service that didn't make its own stuff at the time
started buying exclusivity rights to the big shows, games and movies for the same reason.
As result anime fans can't watch some shows till they fully air in japan,
you have to wait a needless 3 months after the Owl House ends on cable to get it on Disney plus,
Mulan is behind a double paywall and twice the price of a movie and why you
have to get certain games on sub-par services with none of the features.
Its all because the product you're offered is not based on what another company can do better,
its based on what consumers will pay to get it at all. Because they can't be replicated.
Except to some level by piracy, and in 2018 piracy went up for the first time since 2012.
Oh look at that.
But its not just about streaming, this is applies to copyright as a whole
Nothing stops adaptations and sequels in high
demand cost cutting cause they bought the rights and no else is can do it.
EA is infamous for games folks want to play but add predatory pricing models
they'd never get away with if their games could simply be replicated without it.
Nothing stops Nintendo charging for what they didn't before without even getting servers
cause their games have to be played on their online cause no one can replicate their games.
Even mismanaged or rushed projects like the Game of Thrones get rewarded when a
more deserving company never got a chance, and why high demand products can take years
to get to your video game platform, or just never at all, there's no reason to be better.
If you havn't guessed, this video is to prove the problem
with IP but this core rule applies to a couple things outside IP too.
Firstly, everyone hates the USPS. Whats impossible to replicate?
Budget shipping. There's literally a law that bans other deliveries if they're too slow,
its why in the US you can't find non-express couriers.
Secondly is companies like comcast. Same videos, everyone hates cable. In the US
internet companies lay their own cable and you're told there's only one in most areas cause they're
agreeing to not compete, big chance for a new companies though, where are they?
I think local governments try to make it impossible for them by delaying and
adding fees to the approval process companies go through to use the public land where cable's laid
Because local government get 5% of the profits from the cable TV
that goes across the same lines they get more if a single company can price gouge.
When the federal government asked companies why they weren't laying more cable,
they consistently reported excessive fees,
rent and crazy delays that burnt money. And until 2018 FCC said some wanted "$1 million
in prepaid franchise fees and "$13 million wish lists." New cable had to pay that BEFORE laying.
Many let government slide cause a few are laying their own cables but they're only
doing this NOW because internet is important enough to swing elections.
This is why when Google said it was going to do its own fiber and told cities to apply,
Mayors danced cause Google was well known and made the news.
But Google wasn't the first, others tried for years. Verizon was doing fiber to the home in
2005. They just couldn't expand without the media push that threatened relections chances.
And when the hype died down, Google Fiber died with it.
Places like Austin only ever got to 28% coverage with loads of people saying the service they
paid for never came. Google Fiber itself completely giving up on fiber to the home.
Not only do mayors ALWAYS ask the maximum 5% they're allowed,
check yourself on your local website But they always did exclusive deals
when it was legal and they're on record opposing the franchise fee printing on bills,
Satilite TV, Fixed wiress and 5G. All of which could somewhat replicate
cable, these need line of sight and streaming isn't 1-1 with cable anyway.
But even if it was, cable's internet abuse coincidentally protects cable TV
as datacaps push people away from streaming and onto money
saving cable bundles to save data Yes, spectrum doesn't have datacaps,
but that was cause of a merger deal, they're coming back. Don't worry.
Anyway now i've shown the theory elsewhere, lets go next level with copyright.
Why have companies like Youtube, Twitch, reddit and even I think, social media like twitter and
facebook survived for years without ever being threatened despite countless controversies.
You might think it was the size of the community they couldn't replicate,
but we know that’s false cause Discord beat Skype, so what was it really?
What brings people to watch and upload on these sites
is the sheer mass of high demand copyrighted content already there.
If you had a better twitch or youtube, your features would be nothing without
replicating all the high demand content, which is technically easy with enough money,
you just send out bots to rip it. but because of copyright you'd have
to personally get the permission of each creator, so practically its impossible.
This why piracy sites like the Pirate Bay, Putlocker and kissanime could
gain huge name recognition where legal competitors couldn't, the only thing
stopping them growing too much was lawsuits. If these had paywalls it would be worth it
to rip this content too so you have to wonder what ripping sites would do as a legal entity.
And I know, this and everything I said seems really bad for creators,
I mean copyright and intellectual property as a whole does create problems,
but it was designed so THIS couldn't happen, so creators could profit from their hard work.
But not only do I believe IP fundamentally creates abuse
as I've tried to prove in this video, I believe both ethically and practically,
creators don't need it, which I will argue in the next video.
But not just that, I'm going to put my money where my mouth is.
So you're probably wondering why this whole video is piracy themed, well, okay.
So if you're a mainstay on my channel, you'll know I'm pro-piracy, BUT also you'll know that
i've gone from bad jokes to analysis of jokes, to popular videos with jokes
and more recently, I went from story analysis to some very popular fanfiction.
People keep asking me to become a writer, and with this video I finally found the right excuse.
Do you wanna know where i've been, aaaalll of last year? I've been creating
Studio High Sea, and chapter one of my first original web-comic.
And that webcomic and everything else that comes out of that studio...
Is public domain