Quote:
Originally Posted by kennyc
If you destroy the incentive to create new works there will be none.
|
Oh, and this is an exaggeration. There might be less works, and certain types of work would probably disappear (commercial fiction, airport thrillers, detective fiction). I doubt it would affect the production of poetry much, and given that most literary authors survive on grants, teaching, journalism, etc - it might affect them less than you'd think. A lot of non-fiction would also survive, as the authors largely gain from increased exposure, rather than direct sales. And you'll probably find a surprising number of people writing for the fun of it. Look at the astonishing rise of blogging, for example. This is a golden age of popular science writing, which is free. There is very good travel writing out there - again, totally free.
I'm not necessarily arguing in favor of the destruction of copyright, or total piracy. I just think many of the arguments in favor of the (rapidly disappearing) status quo are much weaker than their proponents think. I also think Cory Doctorow is out of his mind, even though I agree with many of his arguments. At the end of the day I think he's right about one thing. Unless we move to some form of totalitarian state, information wise (and this is actually what the UK and French governments are proposing), amateur piracy is here to stay. So either creators come up with a way to co-opt it and profit from it, or they're doomed. I think moralistic arguments about "entitlement culture" (and incidentally, I buy books) will not be terribly successful, even if they make authors feel better.