There are definitely some distinct issues raised by this situation. It is an example of non-scarce goods, not infinite goods. So distribution is now a major issue, not an irrelevant one. Copyright in this case can be a consideration as to whether this market will be expanded or not. The reason is due to money. If person A originates a design and company B comes in and has way more money and resources and can make knock offs cheaper and publicize wider, they basically win in this case. If artist A sees this and realizes that their right to dictate the "right to copy" is gone they would probably consider stopping. Imagine that company B literally sits there waiting for artist A to develop a new design so they can immediately make a copy and sell it themselves--it's almost like unpaid work from artist A as a designer for company B. This is a strong influence to stop working.
While on a conceptual basis some things might be true, in the real world this is problematic.
In many cases these issues are really about job security, or the desire to keep things the same forever. Academics and librarians (many of the people pushing to keep Google from doing the digitizing) want to remain as the gatekeepers to books and published journals. They are the "experts" and their jobs (they believe) depend on them being the resource to pointing people to where to go to find data. If Google usurps this by making everything searchable these people incorrectly believe that everyone will abandon them and simply use the internet. Much like how you discuss how businesses want to simply keep their old business models forever without innovation, it's the same thing here. They got a degree 25 years ago and want to rely on that idea for their entire career and not re-access or learn and adapt new things.
Are there any equivalents to the video/movie business in this? Is a composition at all related to a script for a video? Just curious to know if we'll see any movie licensing explosions on this same angle.
RSS
Twitter
Non-scarce goods issue (as harknell)
There are definitely some distinct issues raised by this situation. It is an example of non-scarce goods, not infinite goods. So distribution is now a major issue, not an irrelevant one. Copyright in this case can be a consideration as to whether this market will be expanded or not. The reason is due to money. If person A originates a design and company B comes in and has way more money and resources and can make knock offs cheaper and publicize wider, they basically win in this case. If artist A sees this and realizes that their right to dictate the "right to copy" is gone they would probably consider stopping. Imagine that company B literally sits there waiting for artist A to develop a new design so they can immediately make a copy and sell it themselves--it's almost like unpaid work from artist A as a designer for company B. This is a strong influence to stop working.
While on a conceptual basis some things might be true, in the real world this is problematic.
Job Security (as harknell)
In many cases these issues are really about job security, or the desire to keep things the same forever. Academics and librarians (many of the people pushing to keep Google from doing the digitizing) want to remain as the gatekeepers to books and published journals. They are the "experts" and their jobs (they believe) depend on them being the resource to pointing people to where to go to find data. If Google usurps this by making everything searchable these people incorrectly believe that everyone will abandon them and simply use the internet. Much like how you discuss how businesses want to simply keep their old business models forever without innovation, it's the same thing here. They got a degree 25 years ago and want to rely on that idea for their entire career and not re-access or learn and adapt new things.
Any relation to Videos/Movies? (as harknell)
Are there any equivalents to the video/movie business in this? Is a composition at all related to a script for a video? Just curious to know if we'll see any movie licensing explosions on this same angle.