View Single Post
Old 01-07-2007, 05:39 PM   #73
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by nekokami
I think there are more options. We're discussing some of them here . For example, downloads could be tracked if the right kind of protocol were developed, and fees could be paid to creators by a copyright collective (a.k.a. collection agency or collection socieity), which could be funded by a fee per download using a new protocol designed to support legal file sharing, or an internet tax, etc.
That's effectively the Communist Market solution - just funded in a different way.

The problem with statutory fees is that they treat all content as equal. A popular song, for example, would be priced the same as a bad one. That goes counter to a capitalistic system.

It worked well for music on the radio, because it simplified the fee structure and the music companies made their money elsewhere in the market.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote