Control: Locking out the free riders
on
The Crime of Sharing
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Most of the "intellectual property" arguments we see sound like variations of a free rider problem, so-called because an early version of it concerned what damage might be done to a railroad system if riders could freely take unsold seats. Then why would anyone buy a ticket? Few people would, there would be little incentive to build trains, and society's need for transportation would be underserved. Someone (gov or the railroad bull)has to control the free riders.
Now, what social needs are unmet if "too many" people don't pay for their CD/mp3/copyrighted music? Would there be less music? At what level? Would fewer musicians create, or would fewer CDs (or other royalty-producing copies in whatever medium) be cut. The threat we hear is that musicians would stop making music if they couldn't be paid (inplicitly by the corporations whose valuable servcice is the risky one of promoting and marketing them).
And of course the threat that the distributors see is the threat to the channel. They would be happier selling 10 million COPIES of one song than a half million each of twenty (even if it takes 175 years to do so, since the "Bono Bill" gives them that opportunity). More music = more copies, not more songs. So they naturally want to lock out the free riders at the copying level.
Ironically, one of their favorite tools is a prohibition against people distributing there OWN creations. Dmitry Sklyarov, Edward Felten, and Jon Johanson are in trouble for sharing their own creations.
Governments that promote charity (through tax deductions, or whatever) are also destructive of the economy! A lawyer who does pro bono work is stealing steak from a starving lawyer who could be making money selling the same services. When I listen to a street corner musician without putting money in his hat, I'm damn well helping that musician to ripoff the RIAA and Ticketron of the money I should be spending with them.
If you give something away, you are depriving someone of their natural right to sell it. And I'm gonna report you the the BSA!
Or how about a 2-for-1 deal? They pay their staff and open source folks, who can then send some of the loot along to the their choice of correct charities.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the "intellectual property" arguments we see sound like variations of a free rider problem, so-called because an early version of it concerned what damage might be done to a railroad system if riders could freely take unsold seats. Then why would anyone buy a ticket? Few people would, there would be little incentive to build trains, and society's need for transportation would be underserved. Someone (gov or the railroad bull)has to control the free riders.
Now, what social needs are unmet if "too many" people don't pay for their CD/mp3/copyrighted music? Would there be less music? At what level? Would fewer musicians create, or would fewer CDs (or other royalty-producing copies in whatever medium) be cut. The threat we hear is that musicians would stop making music if they couldn't be paid (inplicitly by the corporations whose valuable servcice is the risky one of promoting and marketing them).
And of course the threat that the distributors see is the threat to the channel. They would be happier selling 10 million COPIES of one song than a half million each of twenty (even if it takes 175 years to do so, since the "Bono Bill" gives them that opportunity). More music = more copies, not more songs. So they naturally want to lock out the free riders at the copying level.
Ironically, one of their favorite tools is a prohibition against people distributing there OWN creations. Dmitry Sklyarov, Edward Felten, and Jon Johanson are in trouble for sharing their own creations.
Mod this meandering, redundant.
Governments that promote charity (through tax deductions, or whatever) are also destructive of the economy! A lawyer who does pro bono work is stealing steak from a starving lawyer who could be making money selling the same services. When I listen to a street corner musician without putting money in his hat, I'm damn well helping that musician to ripoff the RIAA and Ticketron of the money I should be spending with them.
If you give something away, you are depriving someone of their natural right to sell it. And I'm gonna report you the the BSA!
Or how about a 2-for-1 deal? They pay their staff and open source folks, who can then send some of the loot along to the their choice of correct charities.