I don’t think that this case can be so easily divided into the difference between new and old media models, but I do think there has been a change in the way people consume entertainment properties for which established business models are unprepared. I do object to the thinking behind the lawsuit, and to the RIAA lawsuits and the Mickey Mouse Copyright Extension Act. When a rights holder has to prevent the uses of a new technology to be profitable, or even slow the adoption or innovation attached to a new system of distribution, then I think that the power given to the rights holders vastly outweighs the potential benefits to society from the advancing technology.
Part of my discomfort with this situation has also to do with the fact that the United States doesn’t really enjoy a free market economy. In a true free market, failing entities would not be subsidized by the government or by others in the industry, and would not be able to wield enough power over governmental interference in the industry so that one group of companies would be protected at the expense of new companies.
Holy closet libertarian, batman!
ReplyDeletePart of the problem is that there is just so much money to be made in stealing! The technologies in Grokster and Napster were undoubtedly developed to cater to those who wanted something for nothing. (college students) You Tube is a bit different, I think. It is definitely being used considerably differently.
btw, its the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act. People confuse him and Mickey Mouse all the time. :)
(Mickey Mouse Preservation Act is an alternative name)