Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

On Fri, 31 Jul 1998, Dan L. Burk <burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu> wrote
>
> If (I say *if*) the market is functioning properly, manufacturers,
> landlords, lawyers, and the rest should be naturally pushed by
> competitive pressure to lower their prices to marginal cost. But that's
> because they deal in congestible goods and services. Intangible goods
> are different because we have intervened in the first place -- by
> creating copyrights, patents, and so on -- to artificially inflate the
> price above marginal cost. If we're going to do that, we shouldn't do
> it any more than we have to -- and we generally don't have to past the
> point necessary to induce creation of the work.

This half right, assuming there is no intangible value to "location" of real estate, to the "reputation" of a manufacturer or lawyer, or a perception of "scarcity," of goods and services offered for sale.

The reason landlords, manufacturers, and lawyers are richer than most publishers is they have intangibles that cannot be so easily undermined by photocopies and computers. The concept of "perceived value" applied to pricing is will documented particular in the computer industry where early adopters will pay unreasonable sums to be first with the most buggy gizmo.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com Received on Tue Aug 04 1998 - 16:18:15 GMT