Re: INFO/NYT: Copyright Was a Quaint Idea In Its Time

On Thu, May 11, 2000, Jay Beahm <ajlives[_at_]hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> In the world of what is "right", I completely agree. But your
> premise that if you give people an easy way to pay for information,
> they will -- I hate to burst your bubble and be the one to tell you
> this, but that's completely naive.

     Considering the vast number of people who mostly follow the law I'm comfortable believing that most people will try to do what they believe is right if they perceive that they have an opportunity to do so. After all both you and I generally try to do what is right...

> I have worked for four companies that have all been approached about
> getting a license for photocopying. Even though I supported it and
> pushed hard to get it, every one of them turned it down. Why?
> Because they didn't want to pay for it and they didn't believe we'd
> get caught.

     That only shows that the costs were seen as too great for the benefits of paying the costs, it doesn't show that they were unwilling to do what was right. One of the problems with blanket licenses that cover many periodicals and usage is in setting the price. If the costs are directly tied to the actual usage and there is a direct consequence to the copyright holder of setting a particular price or usage restriction then both the customer and the copyright holder can use the market to set a price that both feel is sufficiently reasonable for a sale to occur. Blanket licenses don't have the advantage of market forces -- unless you count the financial consequences of an infringement conviction or out-of-court settlement. Any market that depends on coercion for setting a price or making sales is not going to work well.

> Well, guess what? One of them (where I no longer work) got a
> letter from one of the journal publishers threatening to bring them
> to court for infringement. I found out from a former co-worker that
> they had to spend more than $200K to settle with the journal pub.

     Indeed. That may have netted that particular journal more than they would have made from the company purchasing a blanket license -- but it may have still been more affordable for the company than having to pay year after year an amount that they feel is over-priced for their actual usage, and which is administered in a way that the just benefit to the journal is not perceivable by the company. For effective voluntary compliance it needs to be clear that the money goes to the person who deserves it and that the price is a result of a market negotiation between the copyright holder and the content-user.

     Sincerely,
     Christopher

Christopher Gwyn
<christopher[_at_]icopyright.com> Received on Sat May 13 2000 - 18:46:12 GMT