[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Intelectual Property Law

On Aug 2, 2012, at 9:00 AM, Brad Alexander wrote:

> The thing I don't understand is that the content producers bang on
> about "intellectual property" which, if I am understanding correctly
> (and I believe I am) is the *content*. The music or movie or whatever.

I claim there's a lot more to it than that. And "intellectual property" 
is a misnomer.

> So let's look at a practical example. I bought, say for the sake of
> argument, Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. I bought it when I was a
> teenager on cassette. A few years later, it comes out on
> 8-track...Then on CD.

 why do I have to buy the *same* IP
> every time the industry decides to change formats?

In my case, let's consider Dave Brubeck's album where they were playing 
around with time signatures. I don't remember the name, but it was the one 
with "Take Five" on it. When I bought it in my teens, the only format was 
vinyl disc. Then a few years later, it came out on CD. I bought that too. A 
friend of mine brought out the same argument you do.

"How much would you pay," I asked him, "for a 1:1 dub of the 15 ips master tape 
of that disk? No surface noise, no turntable rumble, less wow & flutter, lower 
harmonic distortion, better frequency response, etc." 

"Oh, yeah," he said.

If I buy an audio cassette of something, I've paid for the content. It seems 
reasonable to me that I have the right to make a copy of what I bought with 
machinery I own. But if I don't have access to a higher quality version of the 
music, and/or I want somebody else to make the copy, I'm going to have to pay 
something for it.

> what about a movie. Bought it on BetaMax,
> which was forced into obsolescence by teh content producers, so then
> it was out on VHS,

You could still watch it in BetaMax until your BM player died. And VHS barely worked 
anyway. You were better off with the BetaMax.

> then LaserDisc,

LaserDisc was a better format than either of the tape formats. And you still had 
your BetaMax version to watch.

> then DVD, now Blu-ray.

Both technical improvements (if you don't mind the DRM and FBI warnings). And you 
didn't have to buy either if you didn't want to. But if you did, you got a better 
version of the movie (longer lasting medium, higher resolution, takes up less space 
in your living room, etc.)

Now, there oughta be a way to pay for just the improvements if you have an earlier 
version already, but our masters have decided not to provide such. It would be a 
real mess to implement anyway, and it likely wouldn't turn out any cheaper, what with 
all the bookkeeping and stuff...

> It's akin to the grocery store charging you for the state of the food
> you buy. Well, it was raw when we first charged you, now it is
> cooked.

Is Safeway a better cook than you are? Then pay them for the labor and utilities and 
tools needed to cook it. Is your friend a better cook? Then invite him/her over to 
share the dinner. Otherwise, cook it yourself.

> Am I wrong here?

A little bit. The issue isn't named well enough to see the whole picture. 

Am I wrong here?

Glenn English
hand-wrapped from my Apple Mail

Reply to: