In an age where the democratization of knowledge and creativity is increasingly clashing with the concept of intellectual property, we are witnessing a significant shift in how intellectual content is produced, distributed, and consumed. The traditional stronghold of intellectual property rights, once the bastion of artists and creators seeking to protect their work, is now being challenged by new technologies and a growing resistance to the monopolization of knowledge. This article delves into the complexities of this transformation, exploring the implications for creators and consumers alike, and highlighting the need for a more equitable system that balances the rights of creators with the public's access to information.
Three years ago, I experienced firsthand the complexities of intellectual property laws when I published a book of short stories in Israel through a publishing house owned by a prominent newspaper. My contract entitled me to 8% of the book's sales income after various deductions. However, when I won a prestigious education ministry prize, the publishing house claimed all the prize money, citing their copyright ownership.
The capitalist narrative has long touted intellectual property rights as essential for incentivizing creativity and ensuring that artists can profit from their work. This narrative suggests that without such protections, the risks associated with producing and distributing creative works would be too great, and the public would ultimately suffer from a lack of access to these works. Yet, this is a misleading portrayal of reality.
In the United States, only a small fraction of authors, musicians, and actors can truly live off their craft. Many of these individuals, including high-profile artists like Madonna and Arnold Schwarzenegger, have become as much businesspeople as they are creators, often defending their intellectual property for financial rather than creative reasons.
Economic logic would suggest that the more expensive and niche a creative work is, the more its intellectual property rights should be emphasized. For instance, a specialized academic book that costs 50,000 DM to produce and targets a small audience would need to be priced high to recoup costs, making it vulnerable to the impacts of piracy. Conversely, a book with broader appeal and lower production costs could tolerate some level of piracy without significant financial harm.
However, the reality is counterintuitive. As production costs decrease, particularly with digital technologies, the battle against piracy intensifies, even though the market is global and marketing channels have expanded. For example, the film industry now earns a substantial portion of its revenue from video sales, which quickly recoup investment costs.
Governments worldwide, under pressure from wealthier nations, are implementing and enforcing intellectual property laws. Yet, for every factory shut down due to these laws, new sources of piracy emerge elsewhere. This seems illogical given the lower costs of production and the global market, but the persistence of piracy in poorer markets, where consumers are unlikely to afford legal prices, suggests that the issue is more complex.
Intellectual property is a relatively modern concept. In the past, knowledge and creative works were not seen as property but as communal assets. It wasn't until the Industrial Revolution that the precursors of intellectual property, such as patents for industrial designs and processes, emerged. As markets expanded and financial stakes grew, so did the emphasis on intellectual property rights.
Despite their name, intellectual property rights are less about intellect and more about property. They represent Big Money, with the market for intellectual property surpassing total industrial production worldwide. The goal is to secure monopolies on specific works, which is particularly problematic in academic publishing, where small-circulation journals restrict even non-commercial use of their content.
Companies like Microsoft face a pricing dilemma in the global market. They can either adjust their prices to reflect global purchasing power or use differential pricing, as seen in the pharmaceutical industry's approach in Brazil and South Africa. For instance, a product like Encarta is prohibitively expensive for consumers in Macedonia compared to the United States, suggesting a need for price adjustments or a global average price.
High prices for intellectual products implicitly favor a small, elite clientele, raising moral questions about global access to education and knowledge. The thriving pirate industries indicate that at the right price, there is a significant demand for these products.
Two technological developments threaten the future of intellectual property rights: the Internet and the advancement of computing power. The Internet has become a platform for academics and creators to bypass traditional publishing, with vast amounts of content available for free. Meanwhile, advancements in technology have empowered individuals to produce and distribute content on par with large organizations.
The traditional advantages of intellectual property corporations, such as capital, marketing, and distribution networks, are being eroded. Psychological shifts against the commercialization of intellect, along with the marketing and distribution capabilities of the Internet, are leveling the playing field.
The future of intellectual property is uncertain, with old industries fighting to preserve their monopolies. However, they face three processes that may render their efforts futile:
The model of providing content subsidized by advertising, as seen in print newspapers, radio, and television, now dominates the Internet. Content creators will increasingly rely on advertising revenue rather than royalties or ownership of intellectual property.
The removal of intermediaries in manufacturing and marketing is a historic trend that is gaining momentum. For example, streaming audio and downloadable MP3 files are challenging the CD industry, and the Internet is opening up marketing opportunities for niche products.
In a market with diverse niches and consumer preferences, economies of scale in manufacturing and distribution become irrelevant. The future mega-corporation may resemble a collective of start-ups rather than a monolithic entity.
In conclusion, the traditional concept of intellectual property is undergoing a profound transformation. As technology continues to advance and global access to information becomes a pressing issue, the need for a new system that respects the rights of creators while ensuring public access to knowledge is more important than ever.
The Ubiquitous Britannica 2015
Encyclopedia Britannica is now online and as a DVD. The print edition has been discontinued.
Pears Cyclopaedia 2014-5 Edition: Human Knowledge Encapsulated
Pears Cyclopaedia is the last remaining one volume reference work.
Envy as the Foundation of Capitalism
Envy is either destructive, or, as in the case of capitalism, constructive.
