LawMeme LawMeme Yale Law School  
LawMeme
Search LawMeme [ Advanced Search ]
 
 
 
 
Won't Anyone Think of the Pornographers?
Posted by Ernest Miller on Wednesday, October 23 @ 16:10:05 EDT File Sharing
Ed Felten talks about compulsory licensing of music on Freedom to Tinker (A Bad Idea Whose Time Has Come?). The idea of compulsory licensing is that a tax would be charged on things like Internet connections, recordable media (CD-Rs, etc.), hard drives and the like. This tax would then be distributed to the record companies, artists and songwriters. In return, P2P networks would be legal. He points out some of the bad aspects of the policy:
There are plenty of reasons to dislike this proposal. It's a non-market approach, based on a tax-and-redistribute model. It makes the price of music a political issue, rather than something to be worked out consensually between buyers and sellers. And a politically viable version of it would necessarily lock in much of the economic inefficiency in today's music business.
But he ultimately suspects "that it's the only way out of the mess we're in."

Perhaps he is right. But if so, why should the policy be restricted to music? If you check any P2P client that permits you to watch what people are searching for, you will find that, after music, pornography is the most widely fileshared product.

Thus, I propose that if compulsory licensing for music is adopted, we should adopt compulsory licensing for pornography. A tax should be imposed and distributed to those who make pornography on the same basis that music is so supported. The tax might be a little smaller (though likely not much). The logic seems the same to me.

 
Login
Nickname

Password

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
Related Links
· Ed Felten
· Freedom to Tinker
· A Bad Idea Whose Time Has Come?
· More about File Sharing
· News by Ernest Miller


Most read story about File Sharing:
Interpreting Cary Sherman

Article Rating
Average Score: 4.3
Votes: 10


Please take a second and vote for this article:

Bad
Regular
Good
Very Good
Excellent


Options

Printer Friendly Page  Printer Friendly Page

Send to a Friend  Send to a Friend
"User's Login" | Login/Create an Account | 3 comments
Threshold
  
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
Re: Won't Anyone Think of the Pornographers? (Score: 0)
by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Wednesday, October 23 @ 16:28:39 EDT
In the US, aren't we already paying these "taxes" on blank CDs, blank DATs, and digital media players? Isn't that playing favorites for the music industry? Why should hard-drives be "taxed" and the revenue given to Microsoft?


[ Reply to This ]

show me the money (Score: 0)
by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Wednesday, October 23 @ 18:55:28 EDT
The tax revenue is split up among musicians, songwriters, etc., based on how often each piece of music is played (as determined by statistical sampling)
I'm having my doubts about the feasibility of this. Will only certain, statistically monitored filesharing networks be legal? What about website downloads. And there will loads and loads of attempts (probably difficult to stop) to rig these statistics. More likely is that major campaign fund donators^W^W^Wpublishers will get money, individuals will get none.


[ Reply to This ]


Leges humanae nascuntur, vivunt, moriuntur
Human laws are born, live, and die


All stories, comments and submissions copyright their respective posters.
Everything Else Copyright (c) 2002 by the Information Society Project.
This material may be distributed only subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Open Publication License, v1.0 or later (the latest version is presently available at http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/).

You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php