Will scanning hurt the magazine industry?

[Avant Garde]

We scan many editorials at TFS, and it makes it easy to save the editorial and look at it. Scanning the editorials makes it less necessary to go out and buy the whole magazine. Do you think that this could be a problem for the magazine industry? Or is it too insignificant to actually bring down magazine sales. What are your thoughts? I heard that bwgreyscale was shut down because of legal issues, and it could be a matter of time before other sites are shut down also.

 

[Avant Garde]

from: bwgreyscale http://www.bwgreyscale.com/discussion_boards/viewtopic.php?t=4212

Most of you know about the C&D (Cease & Desist) sent to me by Victoria Secret. That, in itself, was a minor annoyance. I would have been happy just to delete that 1 page from my site and say "Good Riddance" to them. The bigger problem came the next day, when I received a 2nd lawsuit from Advance Magazine Publishers Inc (Conde Nast ... Vogue, Glamour, Allure, Mademoiselle, Jane and more). I ignored it, as lawsuits do not usually arrive via e-mail, but the next morning, the Fed-Ex guy showed up at my house with the documents

The next day, same thing ... this time from Hearst Media (Cosmopolitan, Harpers Bazaar, Marie Claire, etc) and their suit was even nastier than the previous one.

Apparently, a law has been revised to close the loophole of the "fair use law" which websites would use in their defense. The Online Copyright infringement Liability Limitation Act of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C sec 504 and 512. These suits were also filed against my webhost, which puts a lot of pressure on all of us to act quickly.

I am not sure if they joined forces, or its just a coincidence that the suits all came at the same time, but either way, there is nothing I can do about it. I have no defense !!!

I have been thinking about what to do with bwgreyscale.com all week. I have decided that it would be a shame to delete all the information, and links from existance, so I am turning it into a "Fashion Link Portal" which will allow me to save all the links and information contained in it. I will also slowly be adding scans (from OTHER publishers magazines) to augment the site, and of course, the boards will remain

BW

 

[OlgaKorbut]

I'm not sure what effect scanning has on magazine sales. It hasn't changed my buying behavior much. Granted, there have been instances when I've considered buying a mag and people's scans have told me it's not worth the money. But, on the other hand, I've bought loads of magazines/issues I normally wouldn't have because I've liked the scans enough to get my own copy. And I still keep my subscriptions and buy my 'standard' mags, scans or no scans.

That new or revised law sounds very unfortunate for any site where people post scans, though. I had no idea, but I'm sure BW's not the only one who's received a C&D.

 

[fouroclock]

I say, f*** that. They're already publishing the pictures for the public to see. Why can't they let some go for free? Let's say I enjoy a photographer or a model's work. But I can't afford to buy the magazines he works for all the time. And I can't always buy past issues since they go out of print. An I gonna be barred from seeing this stuff on the internet too?

When they limit for this work to be seen, people who could be inspired by it will never get the chance.

If a compromise can be made, thumbnails of the editorials should be put up in a site. There should be an official/unofficial online library (like what bwgreyscale tried to do) where this stuff can be stored and seen. And by library I mean free.

How much money are the magazines losing when people put up scans? If they're losing money, it's probably not because of scans, but because of the lack of interest of the common consumer.

This is a much neede thing to discuss. Karma.

 

[cutxpaste]

I still buy magazines, but I love scans so I can saved editorials that I love from magazines on my computer.

 

[susie_bubble]

I have wondered about this myself - being both an avid consumer of magazines and someone who scans a lot for TFS. But the way I see it is not everyone has access to some hard to find magazines like Purple, Lula, i-D, D&C.... lots of countries don't import them in so sharing them online is the only way to have access to them. And if you want the magazine enough, scans aren't really sufficient coz you'd wanna read the actual thing rather than just look at images so people would buy them anyway.

 

[Avant Garde]

Vogue Italia and French Vogue costs a lot where I live, so at least scans let me have some kind of access to the magazine. But even though I can see scans on the computer and internet, part of me still wants the magazine so I can enjoy it anytime. If anything, the scans have made me want to buy magazines more, not less.

 

[MakeUpJunkie]

A lot of magazines that are scanned that I look at are international magazines. I am sorry, but I am not going to pay money to get a magazine shipped from China to NJ, when I cant even READ the articles!

I subscribe to over 14 magazines, and I have a hard time parting with them, so I scan them. It makes it easier to throw them out. I dont like silverfish or whatever they are called lurking around in my room, so I need to throw out magazines. I dont see the problem with scanning magazines.

 

[As You Like It]

I stopped buying fashion magazines about three years ago, frustrated with the recycliing of articles, the trite copy, and the all of the models who looked like they were turned out of a mold. If it weren't for the occasional scan, I'd never see an editorial. For me, fashion magazines don't influence what I will buy or wear. I tend to look at firstview or other sites which have runway photos. I also look at department stores' online shops and the designers' own webpages, and so I can see what the going styles are.

I don't need Today's Fashion reiterated on a blonde 15-year-old riding a crocodile, you know? Half the time, in editorials, they have the girls posed so weirdly that you can't really tell what the clothing looks like anyhow.

 

[LucyInTheSky]

Well, if I see a scan that I really like, I will go out and buy the magazine, and I have about 5 magazines that I will buy regardless of what's inside, so scanning doesn't affect that part. I think it's like going to the bookstore, picking out magazines, and looking through them, or at least for me it is, because the editorials inside help me make the decision whether to buy them or not.

 

[Avant Garde]

A relevant article that brings up a lot of good points

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/magazine/14publishing.html?ei=5090&en=c07443d368771bb8&ex=1305259200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

Laws based on the mass-produced copy artifact are being taken to the extreme, while desperate measures to outlaw new technologies in the marketplace "for our protection" are introduced in misguided righteousness. (This is to be expected. The fact is, entire industries and the fortunes of those working in them are threatened with demise. Newspapers and magazines, Hollywood, record labels, broadcasters and many hard-working and wonderful creative people in those fields have to change the model of how they earn money. Not all will make it.)

 

[iluvjeisa]

We scan many editorials at TFS, and it makes it easy to save the editorial and look at it. Scanning the editorials makes it less necessary to go out and buy the whole magazine. Do you think that this could be a problem for the magazine industry? Or is it too insignificant to actually bring down magazine sales. What are your thoughts? I heard that bwgreyscale was shut down because of legal issues, and it could be a matter of time before other sites are shut down also.

I don't think so. First of all, let's divide the buyers into the ones who are:

1) Interested in one particular article related to the cover star.
2) Interested in having something to read and look at.
3) Interested in the photographic work.

The people in 2) will not be affected by the scanners because they still want something to read on the bus and now that many of us can surf on the bus, it never happens that a magazine is scanned fast through and through.

The people in 3) will not be satisfied by the scans posted at tFS, which are not of the greatest quality, due to resolution restrictions. The non-HQ scans are advertisement rather than stealing. A magazine is seldom presented with all the editorials perfectly scanned. When they are presented at least partially in such a way, it is usually months after the publication date because of the rather time-consuming activity that scanning still is.

Finally, the people who are buying the June issue of American Vogue because they are Uma fans, or interested in Uma only, may find their way to her editorial. This may, of course, lead to that the celeb-worshipers may buy the magazines less, which leads to that it makes more sense to put less famous people on the covers. So the sad thing that will happen from this is that we get to see more obscure stars (such as models) on the covers.

Or, this is almost certainly wishful thinking given the publicist links between fashion and movies which exist today. They'll just blame their decreasing sales on the scanners rather than their sad covers

 

[Faith Akiyama]

Oh man, I had no idea this has happened to BWG...I hope everything will turn out okay

I agree with susie and iluvjeisa's points. Personally, I've always considered providing scans as a way to promote the magazine's name. We are a visually-oriented society, and simply describing contents of a periodical in text is not enough for consumers. Besides, a good amount of revenue for magazines already come from subscribers, and I'm sure 99.9% of them won't suddenly unsubscribe if they realize that scans are available online.

There is also the concept of back issues being not readily available for most of the major titles -- if the magazine publishers themselves won't provide archives of images that could prove to be valuable information (Even ones that may cost money), how can they not expect someone else to feed the needs of the public?

 

[Faith Akiyama]

I think this poster's post on BW discusses the issue from another point of view very well:

First off, I would like to say how utterly disappointed I am with your news. I, in fact, work within the very industry that has taken action against your site. To me, BWgreyscale has acted as a vital source of inspiration for years. As a fashion stylist and art director I have used this site and its images as visual references for lighting style, hair/makeup, locations etc. when presenting a concept to photographers and creatives. It has proved a highly accessible and easy to use site in my fast paced life. Sifting thru endless piles of magazines and journals for tear sheets has been virtually unneccessary due to this wonderful site... and being a total magazine junkie, the site has also spared me the trauma of cutting up my beloved glossies (which I paid for). After just a copy, paste and print, I was armed with enough reference material to go forth and create even more spectacular images for the very industry that has brought this suit against you... (talk about shooting themselves in the foot?)

What I dont understand about this whole business is, Why? Firstly, all the scans on the site aren't of high enough resolution to be published elsewhere. Secondly, all scans are from back issues which have already been taken off the shelves, and finally, encouraging sites like this actually fuels the thirst for fashion, which creates an interest in the subject which in turn adds to magazine readership, which obviously adds to advertising revenue... If publishers don't want anyone other than the magazine purchaser to see it, then I suggest they start sending security to reception rooms and doctors surgeries across the globe, confiscating all (unpaidfor) reading material too!

Such a shame... the scans section will be sadly missed... I suppose i'd better go buy some scissors...

(From member element)

 

[iluvjeisa]

Interesting points of view! However, I suspect this is not a valid argument, since we're talking about intellectual property. There is a great deal of difference between Conde Nast's employees and fashion workers in general. These images belong to Vogue, they set it up, paid for them, organized it, published it. I suspect they have their reasons for not wanting to share even unaccessible magazines.

I think that somewhere there is the idea that the vaults of Vogue will be accessible to everyone now, which is not a tractable scenario according to many CN fashionistas. Everyone with a harddrive who is interested in fashion 20 years from now will relatively easily acquire 25 years worth of Vogue/Bazaar scans. This is much easier than storing thousands of magazines, or clippings, which takes both work and organization. This will lead to that the imagery of Vogue/Bazaar is much more than a flicker in the minds of the fashionistas, but archives which they can all dip into very easily. It's still a chore, but it becomes possible to accomplish compared to having to go through Vogue's own physical libraries.

Knowledge is power, even in fashion, and the publisher wants to protect it. I can understand that, but I don't think they should have the right to protect it at the level they are attempting to, for the reasons I stated above unless they provide certain services. That is: I suppose a magazine is similar to watching a movie, something fleeting, passing in time. You can get another version of the movie by getting the disc later. I wouldn't really complain if they published a book, preferably digital, of their collected editorial images every half year (which should make a nice 300 page volume). But they don't. So they have absolutely no moral right to complain when fashion fans of the world help each other to make such collections.

 

[Faith Akiyama]

^I see what you mean!

I do wonder if Conde Nast has ever noticed the "Free Downloads" of US Vogue and other magazines that're openly available on certain Chinese websites It's unfortunate that they had to go after BWG first before even touching a finger upon those who are really cheating them out of their money. I guess an English-speaking site is more accessible and easier to deal with? Heh.

 

[Alien Sex Friend]

yes or not it`s a question but it` s illegal of course- look at bwgreyscale which has been compelled 2 remove all his scans due to legal problems
"partial or full reproduction of materials demands the sanction of edition."
So not authorized scanning is pursued by the law

 

[cutxpaste]

I agree with susie and iluvjeisa's points. Personally, I've always considered providing scans as a way to promote the magazine's name.

I totally agree...if it hadn't been for some of the scans on tFS, I wouldn't have been exposed to such great publications and gone out and bought them.

 

[John Black]

Well the scans are great and I am always happy when I find some cool "scanned" editorial or a cover. But there is nothing like to hold the original magazine - many times i am printing the scans, but its not the same and never will be. And another point - when I see something I really like I just go out and buy the magazine. And I dont thing its just me buying the mags because of a particular stuff I have seen on the internet before.

 

[MakeUpJunkie]

I totally agree...if it hadn't been for some of the scans on tFS, I wouldn't have been exposed to such great publications and gone out and bought them.

If it werent for the scans I wouldnt have had my friend in London ship me a UK Vogue because Kate Moss was on the cover, and I saw how beautiful the editorial was. Now that is a scan helping the magazine industry!