Text: Small Text  Normal Text  Large Text  Larger Text

Blog Archive

PrevPrevMay 2012NextNext
SMTWTFS
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031

National Post Op-Ed On Copyright

PDF  | Print |  E-mail
Friday June 06, 2008
Peter Shawn Taylor with a lengthy piece in the National Post on copyright.
Comments (2)add comment

Nattt said:

Bad Article
It's a bad article. Interesting from the historical perspective, but bad in that it characterizes you, Michael, as a copyright "free for all" whacko. We know that this is not the case. I'd love to see you write a strongly worded response to that article, which does not mention the issues of DRM at all.
June 07, 2008

a guest said:

Good Comments
Truly one of the best comments posted on that link:

The historical examples of artists losing profit via unlicensed copying is subtly different from the current state of affairs. These are examples of distributors in other jurisdictions profiting from the work of an artist w/o their permission. In each of the examples, the jurisdiction is attempting to bolster a newly minted industry at the expense of an established industry.

The current digital copyright issue is a case of existing (licensed) distributors worried losing their profit margin. There's no proof that downloading has actually damaged this profit margin. In fact, changes in distribution (i.e. Walmart's cheaper prices) may be the primary source of losses in the music industry.

In any case, those who download a work w/o license do not map directly into these historical examples. First, they typically use the unlicensed work for personal use rather than selling it (as a distributor might). Second, there's no indication that they would have actually purchased the work had they not gained access to an unlicensed copy.



June 08, 2008

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
Tags:
, ,
Share: Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterEmailPrintPDF
Related Items: