Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: User-created

[Bob <ma...@mb...>]

> Bear in mind though, an artist isn't going to part with their hard labour 
> if
> the compensation isn't equitable. So, as in any market, if there's no 
> demand
> for your work (sooner rather than later), you won't necessarily be able to
> sell it at the price you'd like (so keep it under wraps until the market's
> right).


In those pages you linked before there are a lot of fantasy scenarios,. I 
won't bother point out the silliness of them all, but one in particular was 
Herbert Spencer's hospital bed, unwanted by manufacturers because of the 
lack of Patent. The essay argued that without the existence of Patents in 
the first place, Spencer's bed design would not have been at a disadvantage.

That works the other way, not just for the benefit of the publishers or 
manufacturers, but for the public. For the very reason you lay out above --  
Copyright allows an author to sell, or license, many copies of an 
easily-duplicated property to individuals for a very small price, accruing a 
fair return on his or her labour eventually. Whereas, if everything rests on 
one sale at a price equivalent to the time and effort involved, the market 
may very well never be "ready." Especially when the subject is something 
like 3D art, where the skill and time involved in production is often 
reduced significantly in a relatively short period of time, and the 
usefulness of the model may evaporate completely due to a change in favoured 
technology.


--bob