From: Mike Linksvayer (ml@gondwanaland.com)
Date: Fri Mar 29 2002 - 03:26:50 MST
On Thu, 2002-03-28 at 23:45, Hal Finney wrote:
> In my opinion, the situation we face is very clear. If unlimited
> free reproduction of information goods continues to be possible on
> the Internet, then the profitability of those goods is going to fall
> drastically, and people are going to stop creating them. In a nutshell,
> we are not going to have much new music and movies, if no one has to
> pay for them.
>
> Some people deny this and point to alternative ways for these products
> to be funded, but none are convincing to me. Most people prefer to
> just bury their heads in the sand and not face up to these uncomfortable
> facts. They are like Alex in the Doonesbury cartoons running this week.
> They think there is an inexhaustable fountain of information goods and
> that they can drink from it forever for free. I hope that around here
> we can expect a little more rigor in our discussions of this problem.
> Foaming about the evil corporations is a distraction from the real issues.
Some people eagerly anticipate the day when the production and marketing
of expensive films and music stops. I would expect the creation of such
products to fall off dramatically if copyright were to become
unenforceable (I wouldn't expect much change in new production in the
face enforceable 14 year copyright). However, I don't expect much
change in the quantity or quality of music or film production regardless
of copyright changes or lack thereof. Most music and much film is
produced on the artist's dime with little hope of recouping financial
costs. Admittedly people who only enjoy expensive productions will have
less new material to choose from (though technology is rapidly bringing
down the cost of some aspects "production values"). Personally, I find
no correlation between production expense and my enjoyment of art. 99%
is unbearably horrible, whether it cost $100 or $100 million to create.
Fortunately the 1% I do enjoy is enough to keep me enthralled through
many human lifetimes.
I didn't care for the essay cited. To the limited extent I understand
moral rights, they appear to me to violate the right to contract
freely. If we have copyright, it makes sense to me to allow corporate
ownership of copyright. Every party in this battle attempts to conflate
its interests with those of other parties and use "an enemy of my enemy
is my ally" tactics.
Mike Linksvayer
http://gondwanaland.com/ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:08 MST