Intellectual Property


30
Jun 10

Interview at The Copyright Alliance about ‘Starving the Artist’

Recently I was contacted by The Copyright Alliance to answer a few interview questions about my latest book, Starving the Artist.  Part One of the Interview is now available, and Part Two is coming tomorrow can be read here..

For those of you unfamiliar with The Copyright Alliance, they are a “a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization dedicated to the value of copyright as an agent for creativity, jobs and growth.” They’re also the recent recipient of the Arnold Broido Award for Copyright Advocacy.

All-in-all, they’re a fantastic organization (in my opinion), and one that any creator or individual who cares about copyright or artists’ rights should be aware of and follow. You can learn more about them here.


1
Jun 10

J.A. Konrath Is Not “Embracing Piracy” With His Free eBook Experiment

So this past Sunday, independent author, J.A. Konrath decided to run an experiment.  In order to prove his theory that piracy doesn’t hurt sales he’s encouraging people to steal one of his books for the next month.  Yes, that’s right – he wants people to freely trade, post, share, and distribute his eBook, Jack Daniels Stories for the next thirty days.  The way the experiment is set to work (note this is my simplified explanation) is that he will keep track of the current sales and ranking of the book on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, etc. and see how free trading of his books affects their sales.

To help spur this trading/sharing, he’s offering a zip file containing multiple formats of the e-book on his site. He’s also encouraging those who download the file to upload it to all the file sharing sites they use and distribute it in any way possible (or, if they prefer, not distribute it at all).  Basically he’s giving permission for people to steal his book so he can see if it really hurts sales.

The problem with this experiment however, is that it’s really nothing more than a marketing tactic. By giving permission for people to share this book he’s not, in any way. embracing piracy, but rather he’s embracing alternative distribution channels.  Copyright law grants the copyright holder or administrator the right to determine the price and distribution allowed for any work owned/administered, so obviously if he’s telling people to trade the file and download it without payment, that’s his right to do as the copyright holder. All he’s done is lowered the price of this book to zero for the duration of his experiment.  (If this non-price will continue to be enforced once the thirty days are up, and if so, whether he decides to do anything about it are unknown.) Continue reading →


26
May 10

The Erosion of Price Due to the Pervasiveness of “Free”

When it comes to any product, there are costs involved in its creation.  For things such as cars or waffles or underpants, part of that cost is purely in raw materials.  Each of these items is a physical good, requiring actual matter to create.  The same is the case for items like DVDs, books, CDs and videogames. The difference in these verus the formerly mentioned physical goods, however, is that the vast majority of their primary value (the reason that someone actually wants them) can be replicated digitally, without raw materials other than those that are typically already possessed by people, such as free space on a hard drive. Their primary value is information, and as such it can be broken down into simple bits and bytes and easily distributed for minimal cost.

The other portion of the cost that both of these types of items have is the cost of actual manpower to create.  There’s someone designing the underpants, just like there’s someone writing and performing the music. This even includes if a waffle was made by some sort of automatic waffle maker – that automatic waffle maker was created by manpower (or the robots that created it were created by people who programmed the robots). Or, if the music is completely computer-generated, someone created the computer program that allowed the music to be created. If a person’s time or talent has value, then creation has a cost.

The point I’m trying to make here is that everything has some sort of cost involved in creating it. Nothing is free to create.

With this cost come questions for creators. Do I pass any of that cost on to the consumer? What is my purpose for creating?  What is the price of my creation?

If any of the reason for the creator is monetary, then there must be some price to be paid by someone for some aspect (no matter how vaguely connected) to your creation.  If it’s not monetary, then what did you create it for?  Was it simply to better the human race?  Perhaps it was to strengthen the acceptance of a cause you feel strongly about. In both of those cases you’re at least charging the cost of a person’s time to consume your creation. There are plenty of creations out there that fall into all of these camps, and a lot more.  As such, there’s a lot of competition out there.

The easiest way to compete in business is by offering a lower price. If you are okay with assuming your time, knowledge, talent and effort are worth nothing monetarily, then it’s easy to offer your content for free.  With millions of people creating content today, a percentage of them are willing to offer their creations for free, and that percentage of a lot of people turns out to still be a lot of people. So what we have is a lot of content for free, competing with some content with a price. How does one compete with free? Continue reading →


16
May 10

Jaron Lanier’s Right: The Web Needs Some Scarcity

If you’ve been paying any attention to my recent Twitter updates, you can probably tell from my constant updates that I’m really digging reading You Are Not a Gadget, by Jaron Lanier. I’m a little over halfway through, but so far it’s an excellent look at how Web 2.0 and open/free culture are not only damaging our society, but destroying our importance as individual human beings.  It reminds me a bit of Andrew Keen’s Cult of the Amateur, and whether or not you agree with the premise, I strongly recommend reading it.

What I want to discuss here, however, is from one single paragraph of the book.  It’s found at the bottom of page 102 (of the hardcover) and is part of Chapter Two, “What Will Money Be?” in a section labeled, “Pick Your Poison.”  In it, Lanier says the following:

“It is a common assertion that if you copy a digital music file, you haven’t destroyed the original, so nothing was stolen.  The same thing could be said if you hacked into a bank and just added money to your online account. … The problem in each case is not that you stole from a specific person, but that you undermined the artificial scarcities that allow the economy to function.  In the same way, creative expression on the internet will benefit from a social contract that imposes a modest degree of artificial scarcity of information.”

The reason I’ve deemed this specific quote worthy of its own write-up is this: it’s one of the most eloquent and comprehensible explanations of why everything on the Internet should not be free. Continue reading →


14
May 10

Hollywood’s Injunction to Disconnect The Pirate Bay (This Time in Germany)

Today I was discussing the recent LimeWire copyright infringement decision with a colleague of mine, when he remarked “I want the Pirate Bay shut down too.” Then I realized that some of you may have missed the latest news. According to an article on TorrentFreak, a group of major Hollywood studios have obtained a preliminary injunction from the Hamburg District Court in Germany against The Pirate Bay’s web host, CB3ROB, prohibiting them from connecting the Pirate Bay’s web servers to the Internet.

You can read more about this at Torrentfreak. However, for more information I recommend checking out this article over at The Register in the UK, where representatives from the web host say they know nothing of this injunction, and even go so far as to refer to The Pirate Bay as “fully legit.”

The sad part is, that if the Pirate Bay gets disconnected, it’s almost certain we’ll see it pop right back up in some other country on another web service. I hate to say it, but perhaps it’s time we consider actually putting together laws that require ISPs to block access to sites that are known to be operating illegally. Otherwise, it’s just going to continue to be a game of whack-a-mole.


13
May 10

LimeWire Has Officially Been Deemed Illegal (It’s About Time)

LimeLimeWire has finally been found illegal, liable for copyright infringement, a bunch of thieves, etc.

The news of this has been all over the web (WSJ has one of the best pieces of coverage), but I think Patrick Ross of the Copyright Alliance has one of the best responses to it on their blog.

I left my thoughts on the Copyright Alliance’s site, but thought it was worth sharing here as well. So, consider this my official response to the news.

“This is one of the best pieces of news I’ve seen reported in a long time. It’s about time this happened. I remember a few years ago, I was talking to some people I knew and found out that they don’t ever buy music – instead they only download from Limewire (or did at the time). The thing is, when I told them that what they were doing was illegal, they had no idea. Their response was “but I bought some pro version and a plan.” It was only after explaining to them that it still was unlicensed and nothing went to any of the artists or creators that they saw just how misled they had been.

Limewire’s entire business plan was built around the theft of copyrighted materials, and as you said, they were just fine with that. It’s good to see that the Judicial System has stepped up and given them the smack they so deserve.”

It’s about time.


5
May 10

My New Book: “Starving the Artist” Is Now Available

If you’ve been following my updates here or on Twitter, you are likely aware that over the last nine months or so I’ve been working on a new, nonfiction book, discussing the value of creative works.  The book, Starving the Artist, focuses on how in today’s Internet age where information can be transferred for a negligible amount of money (basically for free), the underlying creation that makes up the music, movies, books, art and other types of media that we enjoy, is being viewed as something that should be free as well.  A lot of this comes from the thought process that the actual cost of a product should be determined in great part to the physical cost of the packaged good, as well as the general philosophy of those that argue “Information should be free.”

The full title of the book is Starving the Artist: How the Internet Culture of “Free” Threatens to Exterminate the Creative Class and What Can Be Done to Save It.  It’s not a book about copyright law or an argument that “free is evil” – instead it’s a discussion of our current state of how we value other people’s work and creations, and how it should not be up to us as consumers to decide whether or not we want to pay what the creator is asking (if they are asking for anything at all). In some ways it’s a response to Chris Anderson’s Free: The Future of a Radical Price and tangential to Andrew Keen’s The Cult of the Amateur.

Continue reading →