Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 6089096" data-attributes="member: 13107">I'm not convinced.  I can see an argument that licensing provided a more efficient way to price content.  But I also see a tendency to overreach in copyright holders --  to consider their material theirs and only theirs alone in perpetuity.  I thought there was to be a balance between a public interest in freeing ideas to be used within society and a private interest to profit from creating those ideas.  There seems to be a lot of "mine mine mine" and "I made this entirely and absolutely all by myself" from copyright holders.  (Not to say that consumers don't also say a lot of "gimme gimme gimme" and "I don't want to pay for that".)For quality and uniformity, for branding, my understanding is that achieving a consistent quality is a very major goal of the branding process.  That is, corporations go to great lengths to ensure their product meets a set standard and uniform product content.  McDonalds all over the world provide Big Macs that are nearly the same.  Toyota Camry's are made to a standard.  Is licensing necessary for products to have high quality and uniform content?  Would quality and uniformity be less without licensing?Thx!TomB</blockquote>