[x-pubpol] Hypebot Mike Masnick interview

[Joly MacFie]

http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2012/07/a-conversation-with-techdirt-ceo-and-founder-mike-masnick.html

<quote>

*<http://p.feedblitz.com/t2.asp?/395530/9876119/4210851/http://kickshuffle.com/2012/07/19/a-conversation-with-techdirt-ceo-and-founder-mike-masnick/kickshufflelogo_300final-4/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_content=395530&utm_campaign=0#main>
In** response to Hollywood super agent Ari Emanuel’s proposal to fix the
digital content market through greater IP protection, you suggested that
Mr. Emanuel was operating under a flawed premise. You said:*

*“The problem, of course, is that his very premise is wrong. He’s taking
the position that we need to “protect” first, rather than just fix our
business models. This is a very mercantilist viewpoint: where protectionism
beats innovation. But we’ve got centuries of economic proof that that’s not
how you evolve and it’s not how you innovate and compete. What you do is
you figure out ways to add value and to embrace new business models. Any
effort that starts from the default position that what we need is more
“protection” rather than greater innovation is doomed to fail — because
that innovation is an unstoppable train, and the “protection” aspect
doesn’t work.”*

*Yet, c**ouldn’t** it be argued that the framers started from the default
position of protecting artists when they drafted the Constitution’s
Copyright Clause? And shouldn’t protection at least be part of the
conversation?*

The framers started from the default position that they wanted to benefit
the public — specifically to “promote the progress of science and the
useful arts.” The *mechanism* they chose, under the belief that it would
work best, was protection. Though, to be fair, it wasn’t originally for
“artists.” Originally copyright law was supposed to be to encourage
“learning,” not wider culture. That has certainly changed over time, which
is fine.
But, I think the key point is that the framers wanted what would create the
best results — the progress of science and the useful arts (for what it’s
worth, the “science” part refers to copyright and “useful arts” to patents,
even though many incorrectly assume the reverse). There certainly was some
concern at the time of drafting the Constitution as to how well such
protectionism would work. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison expressed
skepticism at points, but eventually were won over.

However, I’d argue that they were making those decisions based on gut
feelings, rather than data, because such data didn’t exist. And, actually,
at the same time they were debating that, across the Atlantic, Adam Smith’s
“The Wealth of Nations” was first being published, creating the field of
economics. So, prior to that, the framers of the Constitution didn’t even
have the tools (economics) to measure if these kinds of proposals work.

That’s no longer the case.
We have tools available to us to measure if changes to copyright or patent
laws actually create the desired outcome: benefiting the public. And so we
should be looking at that.
Concerning Ari Emanuel’s specific comments, my argument was that we’ve now
seen plenty of data that shows greater enforcement *does not increase
sales*. What has increased the ability to make money is (a) new innovations
and services and (b) new business models. So my response to Emanuel
actually had little to do with the Constitutional underpinnings of
copyright law, but with the reality on the ground and how you deal with it.
Even if I believed that stronger copyright was the best thing ever, the
simple fact is that everywhere that the focus has been on greater
enforcement and protectionism (as Emanuel is seeking), sales have continued
to drop (and infringement tends to keep growing). But when you stop
focusing on the enforcement side, but focus on innovating and providing
something better, something that people want to pay for, you see people go
and pay. You see it with Spotify. You see it with Netflix. There are ways
to compete that we know work. We’ve yet to see a system of greater
enforcement that actually works to get people to buy more.


</quote>
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.isoc-ny.org/pipermail/x-pubpol-isoc-ny.org/attachments/20120726/6c710622/attachment-0001.htm>