[p2p-research] Fwd: [fcforum] Fw: iPad DRM is a dangerous step backward. Sign the petition!

[Kevin Carson]

On 1/30/10, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:

> you are making 2 references here that would be interesting,
>
> - you mention Eric REasons, can you recall the URL?
>
> - you mention techdirt's attention to alternative open business models,
> would it be possible to reference a few? I think these alternatives are
> still insufficiently known, apart from the open source models in software

What Masnick discusses at Techdirt is essentially the same as Chris
Anderson's "Freemium" model.  So you can get pretty much the same
overview from *Free*.  The idea is to use free content to piggyback
monetized auxiliary services:  Linux distros offering tech support and
customization, music companies selling certified authentic copies
available at a convenient location, Phish selling concert tickets,
etc.

One thing Masnick fails to adequately address, though, is that the
total amount of cash available from such  auxiliary services is less
than what proprietary content brought in.  Or to take Anderson's
example, Encarta sales didn't bring in money equivalent to the
exchange value it destroyed for Britannica et al.

Which is where Eric Reasons comes in.  He argued that innovation would
ultimately result in a large net decrease in total monetized value.

Both Masnick and Anderson commonly argue that exchange value destroyed
by falling costs in one area will be compensated, as demand freed up
by lower prices is simply shifted to the output of other industries.
Total monetized GDP will keep right on going up, Ford's in his
flivver, and all's right with the world.

But this assumes that demand is infinitely, upwardly elastic, and that
some of the reduction in price formerly paid for some consumer goods
will not simply "leak" from the monetized GDP in the form of increased
leisure.  Reasons argues that the latter will happen:  as it costs
less in total labor time to purchase the goods we buy now, owing to
increased technical efficiency, consumers may choose to use part of
the saved wage income to buy new stuff they otherwise wouldn't have
bought.  But they'll probably not increase total consumption enough to
make up the entire reduction in required labor hours; rather, they'll
simply work less, and the total monetized GDP will be lower.

I'll include the Reasons material and the surrounding online debate in
a P2P Blog post.

-- 
Kevin Carson
Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
Mutualist Blog:  Free Market Anti-Capitalism
http://mutualist.blogspot.com
Studies in Mutualist Political Economy
http://www.mutualist.org/id47.html
Organization Theory:  A Libertarian Perspective
http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html