An interesting and informative read on Copyright vs Innovation (1 Viewer)

[Chet_F]

I found an intteresting link to a research study done by a college student, Ari Friedman. Too in depth to summarize but very factual in it's inferences. Here's the link:

http://linuxizer.virtualave.net/STATISTICS/

Enjoy.

Chet_F

 

[John Watson]

Interesting title, but the link gave me 5 popups, including (shudder) Gator corporation, without anything that looked like the article I expected...:frowning:

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Yeah, but it really didn't tell me anything that I wanted to know. I can see the RIAA fussing their figures, just to make their point, and no mention was made of either the dot com bust or 9/11, which has had a serios effect on our spendable funds.

And, to top it off, there hasn't been as much quality music that anyone wants to buy lately. Also, are the sales figures from the stores or from the distributors? Not quite the same. These are just a few items that a good defense attorney would bring up when they start passing out the suits next month.

Glenn

 

[Chet_F]

I guess what the article is addressing is the RIAA's coporate push to have any and everything copyrighted to the END OF TIME. Adn there simple argument is that copyright increases innovation. Whether that be with music, movies, or whatever.

Well...the data proves that this statement is completely false. That copyright DOES NOT increase innovation.

"I can see the RIAA fussing their figures"

The article does address this by stating the data is "scewed" in the later years. Specifically 1990's and onward. It also addresses the economy's effect on sales.

Well....I thought it was a good read. I also think that college kids copying music should spend their energy in a better way like this college student has, i.e. busting RIAA CHOPS. Since for all practical purposes they are a bunch of money grubbing back stabbing liars.

Chet_F

 

[Thomas Newton]

In the music industry's case, copyright stifles innovation.

Look at the threats of lawsuits that the industry made against anyone who dared to import a consumer DAT deck. Look at the refusal of most big labels to sell prerecorded DAT tapes even after Congress handed them copy protection and "royalty" tax on a silver platter. The record labels wanted consumer DAT dead -- period.

Look at the lawsuit against Diamond over the Rio, under the very law (AHRA) that supposedly was going to stop that sort of lawsuit.

Look at SDMI, DVD-Audio "protection", Super Audio CD "protection", DataPlay, copy-protected pseudo-CDs, and DRM. Does anyone think those would have gotten even a half inch off the ground if the record companies could not leverage Government-granted copyrights to work against the Constitutional goal of "progress of the Sciences"? By the way, all of these things welsh on the spirit, if not the letter, of the supposed AHRA "compromise".

Look at the refusal to sell music online. It took the Apple iTunes Music Store to finally start to *approach* what an online service under the existing CD-style price model should be. (To match CDs, they need to drop the DRM and the legalese.)

That's without going into the industry's failure to use new technology to deliver more value. (A failure that nobody else is permitted to remedy.)