Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: User-created conte nt providers, beware!
Brought to you by:
vexxed72
Menu
▾
▴
Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: User-created conte nt providers, beware!
|
From: Bob <ma...@mb...> - 2008-05-27 15:49:22
|
Sorry to be blunt, but your storefront doesn't solve any problem. Certainly, you may create the eBay of artwork, centralizing commerce (you would not be much of a pioneer in that field now), but without copyright protection one sale is enough to completely devalue the work. The artist would be better served working on commission for business companies, where they still only make one sale, but themselves determine (often through bidding) the value of their work. The problem is not how to charge for a work of art. Nor even how to keep people from copying a work that is on the internet for private use. It is, rather, how to avoid having your labour (and I do mean labour, as any 3d artist can tell you that a decent model represents often hundreds of hours of eye-straining, wrist-damaging work), exploited for the profit of others without compensation. --b From: Crosbie Fitch To: 'gam...@li...' Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 4:42 AM Subject: Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: User-created conte nt providers, beware! The QuestionCopyright article uses 'publishers' in the sense of 'traditional publishers' for whom copyright was intended to most benefit. Copyright is actually impotent in the hands of self-publishers (web authors). It is understandable that traditional publishers will villify those who ignore their monopolies through file sharing, and that file sharers will villify those publishers who exert tortuous litigation against them (especially when those monopolies were never intended to prosecute the public at large). As for authors selling their work to their audience without relying upon copyright, I'll summarise what I've been up to in that area below, and then list a few links to Mike Masnick's ideas below that. However, do bear in mind that the issue isn't whether we rely upon copyright for another century or do without it. That decision has already been made. The issue is how we do without it, because it's no longer even effective, let alone reliable. I propose abolition not because that will stop people using unethical privileges, but because it would stop many people getting unnecessarily persecuted by litigous publishers grinding metal long after all tyres have burnt off (their copyright vehicle having reached a wall of ineffectiveness). So, what am I up to in trying to solve the problem of how to earn a living from one's art without copyright? Rather than advertising, the niche I'm focusing on is facilitating bargains between artist and audience, given these two parties seem most interested in an exchange of art for money. I started thinking along these lines when wondering how on earth one could enable members of the public to sell 3D art in a virtual world if it was completely decentralised (lawless wild-west): http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/article_display.php?category=14 I then proposed an auction mechanism whereby an audience could haggle with an artist and all arrive at an agreeable price (that all successful bidders would pay), sooner or later. http://www.digitalartauction.com/ For gamers here's a spin-off article I wrote for Develop magazine: http://tdaa.digitalproductions.co.uk/history/bcbm.htm I then decided something simpler would be better: http://www.quidmusic.com/ Convinced I was on the right track, but not convinced I was best placed to take QuidMusic forward, I decided to create an engine that would support all manner of sites that needed to enable trading between artist and audience, i.e. http://www.contingencymarket.com/ . This, being commission free, would then enable anyone to use it in support of their own site. I'm now working on an even simpler site than quidmusic: 1p2u.com . It's in very early stages of development, but this will test/debug/demonstrate the contingencymarket. I'll then use it to replace the engine in quidmusic, and finally implement digitalartauction, and others, e.g. quidgames. See my site http://www.digitalproductions.co.uk for other links, e.g. http://micropledge.com Here's Mike Masnick's articles from TechDirt (for another approach entirely) The Grand Unified Theory On The Economics Of Free http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939.shtml Others: a.. Economics Of Abundance Getting Some Well Deserved Attention a.. The Importance Of Zero In Destroying The Scarcity Myth Of Economics a.. The Economics Of Abundance Is Not A Moral Issue a.. A Lack Of Scarcity Has (Almost) Nothing To Do With Piracy a.. A Lack Of Scarcity Feeds The Long Tail By Increasing The Pie a.. Why The Lack Of Scarcity In Economics Is Getting More Important Now a.. History Repeats Itself: How The RIAA Is Like 17th Century French Button-Makers a.. Infinity Is Your Friend In Economics a.. Step One To Embracing A Lack Of Scarcity: Recognize What Market You're Really In a.. Why I Hope The RIAA Succeeds a.. Saying You Can't Compete With Free Is Saying You Can't Compete Period a.. Perhaps It's Not The Entertainment Industry's Business Model That's Outdated a.. An Economic Explanation For Why DRM Cannot Open Up New Business Model Opportunities a.. Recognizing That Just About Any Product Is A Bundle Of Scarce And Non-Scarce Goods a.. Scarcity Isn't As Scarce As You Might Think > -----Original Message----- > From: Troy Gilbert [mailto:tro...@gm...] > Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2008 9:47am > To: gam...@li... > Subject: Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: > User-created conte nt providers, beware! > > > http://questioncopyright.org/promise > > Just an initial thought... the point is made here that copyright > "serves no one's interests but the publishers'." Of course, this > article uses "publishers" in the same vein as the RIAA uses "file > sharer", that is they vilify it to serve the purposes of their > argument. > > In fact, they stress time and again that the Internet has brought > about "instantaneous, costless sharing" which apparently is > justification enough for not charing for information -- something I > don't quite understand: why is that because something is "costless" > (even though it's not *actually* costless, but it's pretty close for > most scenarios) it's wrong to charge for it anyway? I mean, it doesn't > cost me anything to play my guitar, but I'd certainly not be in the > wrong to charge people to listen to a performance (and that seems to > be the "solution" for artists offered up by copyright-squashers). > > But something I don't see addressed... in this "Internet-era" we see > many, many more artists that are also self-published. So, these > arguments and vilification of "publishers" and championing of artists > kinda breaks down in a world where there are a great many > self-published artists. In effect, you could substitute artist for > publisher in many of this article's statements with the result being > an argument for stripping *artists* of control over their work and > their ability to derive income from it! Yikes! > > Explain to me this: in a world where copyright is abolished, how does > an author earn an income? Let's say Tom the author writes a book and > sells a copy to Bob. Bob works for Random House. He goes to work and > hands Random House Tom's book. He says, "I wrote this. Let's publish > it." Random House prints thousands of copies and with their marketing > strength drowns out any attempt by Tom to promote and sell his own > work. And without copyright, he has no recourse because Random House > has done nothing wrong ("information wants to be free, man..."). > > So, tell me, practically, given the world we live in today (or > tomorrow, or 10 years from now), how would a creator of IP earn a > living? > > Troy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Gamedevlists-general mailing list Gam...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=557 |
