[Commons-Law] Fwd: [silk] File sharing does not hurt record sales?

[Dev Gangjee]

Just a quick response to this thread...

Increasingly an 'investment' rationale is taking over from 'protecting -
thus incentivizing - creativity' as the basis of copyright. Sudhir's pointed
out the interests at stake in protecting the business of distribution as
distinct from encouraging the creation of new works.

The effects of this encroachment are most visible in the sui generis
database rights regime (in effect in the EU and being debated elsewhere) as
well as in neighbouring rights to copyright such as performers rights and
broadcaster's rights. (We're currently working on an intervention paper
critiquing the WIPO draft treaty on broadcasting law that not only
strengthens existing rights but hikes up the period of protection from 20 to
50 years for no apparent reason).

The problem with any investment rationale is 'bootstrapping' or circular
logic. If you'll forgive the oversimplification :-
1. Why protect investment through the law?
2. Because it generates value.
3. Why does it generate value?
4. Because its protected by law.

There appears to be a deliberate attempt to confuse the two issues of (a)
incentivizing creativity with (b) just protecting something that is valuable
through a strong proprietary regime with 'investment' arguments resorting to
creator/'starving artists' rhetoric.

Even recent well intentioned attempts to untangle file-sharing issues (e.g.
Reducing Digital Copyright Infringement Without Restricting Innovation at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=525662) don't adeqautely
untangle this.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Sudhir" <sudhir75 at hotmail.com>
To: "'Lawrence Liang'" <lawrenceliang99 at yahoo.com>; <commons-law at sarai.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 1:00 PM
Subject: RE: [Commons-Law] Fwd: [silk] File sharing does not hurt record
sales?


>
> Agree with Lawrence on this - focus on record company sales distracts
> our attention from the central objectives of legal regime that regulates
> the creation and distribution of content. How do we devise regimes that
> promote cultural creation while ensuring low access barriers for the
> consuming public. Moreover we should not assume that, like with
> copyright law, incentives for creation and the business of distribution
> should be regulated by the same regime. The moment we address both these
> concerns independently interesting possibilities open up!
>
> Best
> Sudhir
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: commons-law-bounces at sarai.net
> [mailto:commons-law-bounces at sarai.net] On Behalf Of Lawrence Liang
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 8:12 PM
> To: commons-law at sarai.net
> Subject: Re: [Commons-Law] Fwd: [silk] File sharing does not hurt record
> sales?
>
> hi all
>
> on the file sharing and business statistics, whie it
> is useful once in a while to state statistics that
> make an argument that file sharing, piracy etc do not
> necessariy hurt record sales ( see for instance also
> on software, carlos Osorio's work), I am wondering isf
> that is a line that we should pursue at all. Because
> then it becomes a matyter of counter factuals, what if
> I do proive that file sharing does affect record
> sales, does that invalidate or render illegal file
> sharing?
>
> The alrger issue for me would be whether i need to
> necessarily respond to the percieved crisis of
> lessening of music sales, and  if it is a crisis who
> is it a crisis for?
>
> Lawrence
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> _______________________________________________
> commons-law mailing list
> commons-law at sarai.net
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law
> _______________________________________________
> commons-law mailing list
> commons-law at sarai.net
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law
>