Re: intellectual property

[Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I confess that I never heard this story before.  Hal Varian has been at the
forefront of those who want to devise some sort of pricing model to sell
things on the Internet.

On its face the story doesn't make any sense.  For example, on the Internet
today, pornography is among the most profitably businesses going.  Why would
copyrights make pornography less profitable?

Most of the studies I have seen indicate that the free distribution of music
has had virtually no effect on the sales of music -- except to the extent that
it has encouraged people to purchase more music.

A real model to look for 21 in which the producers of music -- the musicians,
songwriters, etc. could find a way to directly connect with the market,
cutting the plea to the record companies out the loop.

Jim Devine wrote:

> In the NY TIMES, July 27, 2000, Hal Varian writes that >The music industry
> argues that it cannot survive in its present form without additional
> intellectual property protection. There is some justification for this
> view. After the French Revolution, one of the first acts of the new
> National Assembly was to eliminate copyrights. Within a few years, only
> pornography and seditious material was being published. Though such
> material can apparently survive any intellectual property regime, the
> French had to reinstate copyrights to provide incentives to produce more
> substantive works. < [see:
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/financial/columns/072700econ-scene.html ]
>
> is this anecdote true? Michael P, what do you think of Varian's analysis?
>
> Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> "Leading a life of quiet desperation -- but always with style!"

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx