• curiouscat.com
  • About
  • Books
  • Glossary
   
       
   
       

    Categories

    • All
    • Cool (25)
    • Credit Cards (16)
    • Economics (184)
    • Financial Literacy (122)
    • Investing (89)
    • Personal finance (123)
    • Popular (19)
    • quote (68)
    • Real Estate (50)
    • Retirement (26)
    • Saving (40)
    • Stocks (51)
    • Taxes (28)
    • Tips (64)
  • Tags

    Asia banking bonds capitalism chart China commentary credit Credit Cards credit crisis curiouscat data debt economic data Economics economy energy entrepreneur fed Financial Literacy government health care housing inflation interest rates Investing John Hunter Kiva micro-finance mortgage Personal finance personal finance basics quote Real Estate regulation Retirement risk save money Saving spending money Stocks Taxes Tips USA Warren Buffett
  • Recently Posts

    • Redesigning the Global Finance System
    • Financial Markets with Robert Shiller
    • Soros on Financial Crisis and Markets
    • Personal Finance Basics: Dollar Cost Averaging
    • Would the Dow Dump General Motors?
    • FDIC Details Plan To Alter Mortgages
    • The Economy is in Serious Trouble
    • Consumer Debt Gets Bailout Attention
    • Easiest Countries for Doing Business 2008
    • What Does That Say About the Field of Economics?
  • Blogroll

    • Brad Setser
    • Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog
    • Freakonomics
    • I Will Teach You to be Rich
    • Jubak’s Journal
  • Links

    • Articles on Investing
    • fool.com
    • Investing Books
    • Investment Dictionary
    • Leading Investors
    • Marketplace
    • Trickle Up
  • Curious Cat Kivans

    • Making a Difference

Investing and Economics Blog

Copywrong

In response to: Fair Use Rights by David Bradley

Copyright is a taking of a public benefit for a private entity. This was put into law in order to increase the total public benefit. The idea was that taking from the public to provide the creator a limited-term, exclusive, government-granted, right to their work would encourage individuals to invest their time in creating works that would benefit society.

So the debate is properly about how great the taking from the public should be. It seem to me the current situation is completely corrupt. Many of the actions are taking public benefit to provide to the private entity where no possible public benefit exists. Extending copyright periods of long ago created works, where obviously the public is harmed purely for private benefit. No possible argument can be made that their is a payoff to the public for this taking.

If you wanted to take such an action and made it only for new work then their could be an argument that now a creator knows they have 100 years of government provided rights and therefore investing more time and effort in their work creates new and better work. I don’t believe this argument but at least it is possible. The current actions though are mainly about large companies using government to take from the public to provide themselves private benefit with no corresponding public benefit.

Lawrence Lessig is the person who has the best insight in this area, in my opinion: The Value of the Public Domain.

Dr. Deming published his seven deadly diseases of western management a couple decades ago. I would add 2 new diseases: Excessive executive compensation and a broken intellectual property system.

Fair use is the right to reference (and quote limited portions of) works that have been granted government copyright protection. This is integral to the whole idea of creating the greatest public benefit (even while providing some government imposed limits on public rights to the creator). The large companies now are using lawyers to greatly increase the harm to society by expanding the taking of public benefit. They threaten and scare many into paying fees (or completely avoiding works that have been granted limited government granted copyright rights) where none are are rightly due (see Lawrence Lessig for examples). This causes great harm to society for the private benefit of a few. This is an obvious failure of government. Those countries that are successful at adopting more sensible systems are going to have a great advantage over those countries that chose to continue to increasingly bad practices of harming society to benefit a few private interests.

Related: What is Wrong with Copyright Taking Public Good for Private Special Interests - Innovation and Creative Commons - Diplomacy and Science Research - More Government Waste - Crazy Watchmen - General Air Travel Taxes Subsidizing Private Plane Airports - China and the Sugar Industry Tax Consumers

July 22nd, 2008 by John Hunter | | Tags: Economics, quote

Comments

1 Comment so far

  1. Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog » Lake Superior vs. Silicon Valley Hot Spots on August 18, 2008 10:11 am

    [...] To be economically successful, countries need to focus on big things (investing in infrastructure, sensible laws relating to innovation, creating and maintaining good capital markets, investing in science and engineering education, [...]

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind

Copyright © Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog

    Personal Finance

    • Credit Card Tips
    • IRAs
    • Investment Risks
    • Loan Terms
    • Saving for Retirement
  • Archives

      All Posts
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
    • June 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • January 2006
    • December 2005
    • October 2005
    • July 2005
    • May 2005
    • April 2005
    • April 2004
TopOfBlogs