Commerce Department Pushing For New "Copyright Czar"
TechDirt is reporting that those all-too-familiar "stats" surrounding the cost of piracy are being trotted out in an attempt to push through a new "Copyright Czar" position. "In urging President Bush to sign into law the ProIP bill, which would give him a copyright czar (something the Justice Department had said it doesn't want), the US Chamber of Commerce is claiming that 750,000 American jobs have been lost to piracy. Yet, it doesn't cite where that number comes from."
If we just hire 750,000 copyright czars, well there ya go. That would be mavericky, you betcha.
We know where those lost jobs went, India and Pakistan all pirated our IT jobs.
--
Oh Well, Bad Karma and all . . .
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
The Commerce Department is not the US Chamber of Commerce.
Chamber of Commerce = non-for-profit business federation.
Commerce Department = Federal Government Entity.
As a matter of fact, the Commerce Department OBJECTS to a "Copyright Czar"
It could be worse, it could be Monday.
They got that number from Henry Paulson - he's so good at pulling out random large numbers that sound plausible while being founded on nothing of substance, after all.
Are there even that many people working in the music and movies/tv industry in this country?
The numbers came from The U.S. Department of the Posterior.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 383,000 people employed in the Motion picture and sound recording industries in September 2008.
My money is on the idea that they took the amount the industries estimate they lose from piracy and then divided that by some moderate wage.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
We need a content producer bailout!!!
Easy. It comes from the set of real numbers.
This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
That 750,000 jobs number comes a very reliable source, the bird. Haven't you heard, about the bird?
stuff |
claiming that 750,000 American jobs have been lost to piracy
Overexaggerated number for sure, but jobs may very well have been lost because of piracy. But, so what? Let me formulate the matters in another light.
750,000 American jobs would have been wasted if piracy hadn't existed to combat the inherent inefficencies in the copyright and IP systems.
Jobs are good if they actually produce something useful to society. Otherwise they are just a big waste, and do little more than shuffle resources around because the current system don't have a better way to allocate it.
Even if more actual intellectual property were produced with stronger IP laws, it still isn't sure that it would be a better idea. The real value of IP isn't how much is produced, but how much is produced times how well spread it is among the population. Also, that total value has to be balanced against the cost of producing it.
Say that 700,000 more jobs would be created. That is a multi billion cost. And what would be the gain. More tv? More music? More movies? It isn't like there is a lack of choice right now.
It comes from the set of real numbers.
Funny, I could have sworn it looked imaginary.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Has any of these "czars" the US government has been fond of appointing the past decade or so actually accomplished anything except creating more serfs?
Why does the US government have people modeled on the most hated monarchs, who drove Russians so nuts that they went "Communist" on us for 3/4 of a century, and nearly helped us blast the world back to microscopic life?
How about Congress just returns copyright to its Constitutional basis: at most 17 years (a human "generation") of private monopoly on any content, but only when that monopoly will "promote progress in science and the useful arts". That regime doesn't need a czar, it needs a searchable content registry archive and an antitrust watchdog.
--
make install -not war
Although it is more in the thousands, possibly as high as ten thousand, it is true that there has been a significant amount of job loss due to piracy in the companies that bring japanese anime over to the US. I've talked with voice actors as well as people who run those companies, and piracy really has hurt them. Some companies are closing up shop, others are just having to severely cut back to make ends meet. This was never a large profit business in the first place, and with people downloading it so much as opposed to buying the DVDs they can't manage to squeak by.
The irony of this is that the "copyright czar" would probably just ignore this as the MPAA and RIAA aren't involved. Not that I'm advocating law suits against people who do pirate it, as I think that is way over the top, just pointing out that people HAVE lost their jobs due to piracy.
Not sure if you're being serious or not, but the Russian "Tsar" has historically been tranliterated into English as Czar or Tsar. For a long time one might have found it spelled either way, but since "Czar" started being used to describe a high government official, e.g., "Drug Czar" the CZ spelling has tended to be applied to that use, while the TS spelling has now nearly always come to be applied to the rulers of the Russian Empire. The OED comments thusly: The spelling with cz- is against the usage of all Slavonic languages; the word was so spelt by Herberstein, Rerum Moscovit. Commentarii 1549, the chief early source of knowledge as to Russia in Western Europe, whence it passed into the Western Languages generally; in some of these it is now old-fashioned; the usual Ger. form is now zar; French adopted tsar during the 19th c. This also became frequent in English towards the end of that century, having been adopted by the Times newspaper as the most suitable English spelling.
Proverbs 21:19
Why does a free market economy need czars? Aren't they an invention of the same country that adopted communist central planning to such poor effect?
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Great idea. I nominate Lawrence Lessig!
Sure, you could say that the lender and lendee are each about half responsible. But the difference is that the lender is supposed to have known better: their job is finance. By contrast, the average homeowner has no financial expertise.
Thus two sides mutually entered a stupid contract, but one of the sides was actually staffed by full-time professionals whose supposed expertise lay precisely in evaluating contracts for non-stupidity.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10