I not only want the visible creators to receive what is due, but the invisible ones, too. I couldn't name a single set designer or costume designer, but I am sure they exist. And I want them to be paid.

I have noticed, via Google searches and some forums, that some folk want totally free content. It makes me feel uncomfortable.

I was on a wrestling forum years ago and, in the off-topic section, whenever there was mention of a new album/comic/film, there were comments like, "Really interested in this, where can I get a free download?" Same when I've recommended comics to folk. Sometimes one will get a, "I like the sound of that and love the character, but I'll look into a free download."

I really noticed it recently via Google. I usually put the title of a book into the search engine so that I can see which bookstores are selling it and maybe even see what sort of rating it has. Recently, I have noticed that the popular search term is, well, choose the name of a book - any book - and something like "free PDF" or "free copies" seems to becoming a popular search term.

I wanted to buy the updated version of THE DEATH OF WCW (a book originally published in 2005). Before I'd typed out the full title online, there were search terms with the book title and then "free book" or "free PDF". If I have it right, Google, or any search engine, saves popular terms. So it just shows how many folk are typing that out. Same when I typed DC REBIRTH into Google, name of the arc came up along with terms like "free download".

I don't necessarily want to pass judgement on the world, but it does make me feel uncomfortable for two reasons: one, people do deserve to be paid for their work; two, even putting the moral issues aside, a TV show, book, franchise or comic will only have longevity if there are sales, TV ratings, etc. I am interested in MASK: REVOLUTION from IDW. I shall buy the first issue next week. I hope many do because I love the franchise and hope the update is as good as the original. But if we all were to head for the "free downloads" (wherever they may be), then actual copies of the comic will be low. And if that happens, not only do creators not get paid for the copies we're not buying, but low sales may equate to cancellation, the perspective being that the book isn't popular.

I was quite annoyed a few years ago when an acquaintance of mine shared something. There's a huge book chain in the UK called Waterstones. He told me he goes into their store, picks up their WiFi and somehow downloads free copies of books that they sell. Acting illegally? No. Acting immorally? Well, I think so. I think it's very low to use the WiFi of a bookstore to get free downloads of books they are selling. 

I want to live in a world where people who compose music, people who write comics and people who do the supporting stuff, like stapling the books, get paid. It only seems fair. 

It may not quite be the same, but, for me, it would feel like sneaking onto a bus without paying for a ticket. I'd be getting a free ride. And if enough people did that over time, the bus company would make less profit. And perhaps less money to pay to its drivers. And all that time, I'd be getting free rides, but contributing nothing.

Are my ramblings making sense?

However, I did subscribe to The Times for a while as they don't have a free site. I was happy to. I would not have shared their content or taken screengrabs for others to view.

I can't imagine it happening with other industries. If I told my community that a new milk delivery man had set up a business, people would not ask, "Oh, so what's the best time to pass his milk truck and take 3-4 free bottles?" No-one would seek to cheat a plumber or painter out of money, but somehow the entertainment industry is fair game?

Like I said in my initial post, it dawned on me with the Google searches. Think of any book title you can and Google it. After the title itself, the second most popular result is the book title and "free PDF" or "free copies". Great, so people can write something, upload it, work on a cover and all the rest of it - just so someone can get a free copy.

It's such an insular society at times. What happens if some folk consume more and more free stuff? In the case of comics, if fewer titles are sold, because people seek and receive free copies, how long before the industry has to employ or subcontract fewer delivery drivers? Or print workers?

People should be paid for their work, whatever it is.

What do you think about that guy I know, who goes into Waterstones, picks up their WiFi and downloads free books? It's not illegal, but it's very immoral.

Waterstones is a store I love - it has fantastic customer-friendly workers - and it sells a great range of books. I want a brand/company like that to survive. If this guy really must have free books, is it fair for him to go and use the WiFi of a bookstore to do it? Why doesn't he spend his own cash on mobile phone data allowance and download the book without piggybacking on a store's internet allowance?

It is weird how people can compartmentalize certain things. What I mean is, they would never consider not paying a plumber because he shows up with a van, tools, etc. But artists/writers/inkers seem distant to them so somehow it's okay to do that. Maybe if they witnessed the inker in their garden, creating the book, they might be less willing to steal.

A) When lots of people are doing the art for free anyway, the desire to pay for it goes down.  There are tons of people creating free content (comics, music, pee wee sporting events, films) and it becomes harder and harder to want to pay for the very best when the argument is "others are doing it for free, it is a labour of love".

B) When the perceived notion that the artist is a millionaire, the desire to pay for it goes down.  If Peyton Manning charged for an autograph, many people would be outraged because he "doesn't need the money".  U2 gave away their latest album and the general public were not floored (because Bono is a billionaire).  When Metallica moaned (and rightly so) about Napster, the general argument was "they are rich, why do they care?"

Not saying it is right.  Just what I have observed.

Not saying I agree, either, but my response is usually, "Okay, let's assume you don't want to pay the very rich actor by spending your £££ on it - but what about not-so-rich folk like DVD distribution company employees, the mailroom clerk, the catering person, etc?" 

Not defending it or saying I agree, but that appears to be the mindset. 

In those cases you or your friends got the content without paying for it. 

If I have a option of getting free content over having to pay for it I'm going to select free most of the time. 

I take things into consideration. If it isn't illegal I'm going to take the free option. If something is in public domain. I'm not going to pay some one for the right to download it.  With that I'm referring to Old Time Radio Shows. 

There have been times when I have illegally downloaded music and movies. In those cases I'm talking about movies that I already own. The Universal Classic Horror films. own the films on DVD. I have downloaded them as well from online because I want them digitally. So I can keep my Discs secure and scratch free.

As far as music goes I download Christmas music or Sinatra, Martin Crosby etc. Songs I've had on disc and have paid for many times before. In those cases the artists are no longer alive and aren't receiving any money. That's where I draw the line. If it's a new film or music I will pay for the content.