We've got no answers, but one thing is clear: no one else does either.
We're talking about music as intellectual property in the 21st century, and the Supreme Court's recent futile gesture to apply last-century standards to this century's reality.
But here's a new twist: the kids aren't necessarily selling their music.
Most of the music our local kids listen to aren't even available on CDs or for purchase. Our son recently bought one of only 100 CDs produced by a band he likes. So there are hundreds of thousands of songs being shared, with little or no intention of making money.
This point was refreshingly visited in a June 29 article in the NY Times by Jon Parales with the great headline, "The Supreme Court Has Ruled, So Enter the Geeks." (we would link to the article, but it is...uh...intellectual property according to the Times)
"On the Internet, people share everything from chocolate chip cookie recipes to the details of last night's date. Motives for sharing music are more complex than a grab for free goods," he writes.
"It's a completely alien mentality for profit-focussed companies that still dream of being paid every time someone hears a song."
Meanwhile, it's fun watching the kids work with creating new standards for intellectual property.
What are your thoughts on intellectual property?
The problem with todays model - and the reason behind much of what the music/movie industry consider to be piracy is that consumers are expected to pay too much for something that often does not meet their expectations - a CD that has 2 good and 8 rubbish tracks is not good value at £16 especially when you can burn your own CD with 10 good tracks for the same price (including legal, paid for, downloads). Film makers spend a fortune on making and then promoting their (often very poor)films - but restrict the release to cinemas in different parts of the world at different times of the year and when it is relased onto DVD they charge more than they do for the VHS version. All this does is to create dissatisfied consumers and a ripe market for illegal copying.
I think that IP will not change as such, the movies and music will still be 'owned' by a person or company BUT the way they are delivered and used will. Over the next few years the material will have to be made available for free (or very low cost) in a low quality/bit-rate version that consumers can pass along as they wish. If you want to purchase a high quality/high bit-rate version you can do so at a *reasonable* price. This allows the consumer to test-drive the media and buy what they want, when they want.
Posted by: James Addison | July 12, 2005 at 06:34 AM