[plug] (semi-near-topic) copyright abolition, music as analogy

[Mike Holland]

On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Trevor Phillips wrote:

> So, I borrow an Audio CD, and I duplicate it, or I MP3 it. And that
> should be encouraged? The original "author" still has his music, but now
> I've got it too!!

Yes indeed. Why not? Would the world suffer?
Intellectual property rights are a market interference, theoretically
given so that society will benefit. But often the laws are written by
powerful lobby groups.
    Abolishing music copyright would save society countless billions in
gained efficiency.
    CD sales would continue, at a few dollars each, and brands would work
for a reputation of recording quality.
    New musicians would be less likely to create over-produced albums, so
the
music might actually sound something like a real performance. Is that so
bad?  Dont you hate it when they play pre-recorded tapes at concerts,
because the sounds cant be done live?

  Most musicians would continue as before, making money from their day
jobs. Even Beethoven had to teach to make money. Does that make his music
worse?

There would be a few less musical billionaires, but concerts and T-shirts
would still be a huge industry. (If we kept T-shirt copyrights :)

> Yep! That guy sure is a wonderful musician! Look! I've got copies of all
> his music!

Dont get so excited. Just explain whats so wrong with it.
Yes, it would change the music scene, but in many ways for the better.
Of course its not that simple. I can see problems that would need to be
addressed.


Mike Holland <mike at golden.wattle.id.au>            Perth, Australia.
                          --==--
I sometimes think that God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.
                -- Oscar Wilde