Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5101766" data-attributes="member: 42582">Krensky, I guess I was thinking more of the underlying sociological issues.For example, before the 19th century popular culture (to the extent that we can meaningfully talk about such a thing - &quot;folk culture&quot; might be a bit better though still problematic) was generated in collective contexts by ordinary people acting out of non-commercial motives. Copyright was therefore a non-issue for most people - even if, for the sake of argument, Mozart enjoyed IP rights in respect of his compositions, for most people the legal restriction this would have placed upon their reproduction of his works would be irrelevant. They had their own musical culture (&quot;folk songs&quot;) which they acquired and/or created through non-commercial means and which they enjoyed without any mediation by legal or commercial considerations.Over the course of the 19th century this largely ceased to be true, at least in industrialised countries. People in such countries are dependent today, for most of their culture, on acquiring cultural &quot;product&quot; from commercial enterprises who have a commercial interest in producing that product, and depend for commercial success upon controlling non-commercial access to it. This is a dramatic social transformation. And I tend to feel that this is what is central to understanding and debating IP.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5101766, member: 42582"] Krensky, I guess I was thinking more of the underlying sociological issues. For example, before the 19th century popular culture (to the extent that we can meaningfully talk about such a thing - "folk culture" might be a bit better though still problematic) was generated in collective contexts by ordinary people acting out of non-commercial motives. Copyright was therefore a non-issue for most people - even if, for the sake of argument, Mozart enjoyed IP rights in respect of his compositions, for most people the legal restriction this would have placed upon their reproduction of his works would be irrelevant. They had their own musical culture ("folk songs") which they acquired and/or created through non-commercial means and which they enjoyed without any mediation by legal or commercial considerations. Over the course of the 19th century this largely ceased to be true, at least in industrialised countries. People in such countries are dependent today, for most of their culture, on acquiring cultural "product" from commercial enterprises who have a commercial interest in producing that product, and depend for commercial success upon controlling non-commercial access to it. This is a dramatic social transformation. And I tend to feel that [I]this[/I] is what is central to understanding and debating IP. [/QUOTE]

Verification