Technology allows us to make copies effortlessly or at a low opportunity cost. I think technology is like a photocopy machine that encourages file and information sharing. Thus, copy and paste functions make grading student papers harder but does increase the content. Weighing the costs and benefits of the proliferation of information is difficult especially in the area of intellectual property. In the following letter to the editor of the Quad-City Times, I try to explain why the courts should enforce copyright laws about file sharing.
Enforcing copyright laws is the answer to illegal file sharing (Federal courts shore up music industry’s old business plan) not minimizing the relative fines. The fines must not be high enough if one million files are illegally downloaded on a daily basis.
Intellectual property rights must be enforced to induce musicians and artists to continue to create more music. Think about how much work you would supply if you had to give it away. Today, copying a song from Lime Wire or Kaaza is as easy as a couple of clicks of the mouse.
When a musician writes a song, all of the cost in incurred in making the original. The next 10,000 copies can be produced with little or no cost. This presents pricing problems for the music producer since consumers equate the price of a product with the cost to make it. When music buyers see the $1 price of a download on iTunes, they believe the price is too high so they share files on a P2P network. This is interesting too me as these same buyers would not take a nickel from the coffee fund but think nothing about taking intellectual property.
Intellectual property rights must be enforced to induce musicians and artists to continue to create more music. Think about how much work you would supply if you had to give it away. Today, copying a song from Lime Wire or Kaaza is as easy as a couple of clicks of the mouse.
When a musician writes a song, all of the cost in incurred in making the original. The next 10,000 copies can be produced with little or no cost. This presents pricing problems for the music producer since consumers equate the price of a product with the cost to make it. When music buyers see the $1 price of a download on iTunes, they believe the price is too high so they share files on a P2P network. This is interesting too me as these same buyers would not take a nickel from the coffee fund but think nothing about taking intellectual property.
Today, just about anything can be digitized. Photos, television shows, lectures at the university, and textbooks are a few information goods that can quickly be digitized and shared. The federal courts must enforce copyright laws or the amount and quality of intellectual property will diminish. In this information age, protecting the rights of information providers that include musicians should be a robust function of our courts.
No comments:
Post a Comment