If you reside within a polity, you produce and consume, both of which contribute. What you produce, others use, and when you consume, others are compensated for their production. All of this contributes to the cultural community, each transaction a vote as to what the sum total of our culture might be.
Government spending distorts this process and thus distorts our culture.
If one wishes to earn money selling ideas and expressions there of, it is surely possible to record those expressions in some sort or media (book, film, cd) and sell them. Today we have limits on what you can produce and sell, with the odd situation that those who do not actually produce anything are allowed to sit back and earn money on those who do.
But, you say, they created, say, the song, and should be compensated. Very good. Let them record it and sell copies. The Grateful Dead, long before the internet, let people "bootleg" copies of their concerts, which people reproduced and sold. With practically no promotion, the band became one of the most famous ever.
Here is a song being created, which steals from bossa nova, Paul Butterfield, Ray Charles, and Frank Sinatra. The band creating the song did very well. You must pay them to play this song. But wait, they do not pay any of the aforementioned people for their contributions to the song. The problem here is gun barrel politics established this system, not the market.
Gun barrel politics is where no matter what the rule, any resistance on your part with be met with ever escalating violence, up to being gunned down by state agents.
We need to replace the IPR (intellectual property rights) regime with CCF (community cultural freedom) regime. All ideas are open to all to exploit in any way. If you want to make money on cultural items, intellectual "property," then sell copies you made. Depend on marketing, not violence, to advance your business.
If we could just break on through this other side...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfQAaK1pFM4&NR=1&feature=fvwp
0 comments:
Post a Comment