Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 6089721" data-attributes="member: 13107">Mostly I am replying to this paragraph:Two notable tweeks were the Sunny Bono Copyright Extension Act and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.  I understand both to be controversial, and to be viewed as providing a disproportionate benefit to the copyright holders relative to the benefits accrued by society as a whole.In the statement that "increasing the weath of IP creators" is a "good" thing", since it "encourages others to create IP", I can find problems in the details.Normally, increasing weath and encouraging the creation of IP should be good outcomes.  Looking to the example of the Copyright Extension Act, I don't doubt the extension increased the wealth of current IP holders.  However, that wealth overall was increased doesn't seem to necessarily follow.  Many business opportunities which would have been enabled by not extending copyright were quashed.  Additionaly, the effect to encourage new IP seems rather small.In the details, in considering IP law and policy, I ask:*) Does the law or policy increase the wealth of a few (e.g., current copyright holders), or of many (new potential IP creators, business partners of the IP creators)?  Does the law or policy create wealth by increasing prices or by creating more product and more sales?*) Does the law or policy effect a net increate in IP?  There are at least these contrary trends which must be taken into account: Restrictions to existing IP.  Refocusing resources on enforcement as opposed to IP creation.  (This includes loss of utility due to protection mechanisms.) Reduction in availability due to price increases.*) Does the law or policy encourage the use of new ideas, or is there a stifling effect?Thx!TomB</blockquote>

Verification