What better way to start off my new blog than a tech-economy geekout?

Peer-to-peer filesharing - in its current configuration (that is, limitless replication without any mechanism to ensure creators' compensation) - is ultimately not going to be able to work economically. though it's arguable that it's currently a better arrangement despite the risk to content creators (for a more detailed analysis see here.)

Anyway, as he argues, the current copyright arrangement is extemely badly suited to such a "replication economy" and is intended to shift risk from record labels to content consumers (to the financial benefit of the labels of course - bastards). This is not to say that ultimately DRM won't need to be a part of the solution, but that it will need to contain mechanisms to effectively take advantage of the benefits of replication in "true" peer-to-peer distribution - that is, through existing social networks.

Because labels and associations won't see the same revenue per copy of the media and can't or won't recognize replication's advantages, they'll shit themselves. Consumers, especially those accustomed to the current p2p arrangement, will also initially be unwilling to accept the new standard.

But ultimately, something like Human Licenses (more here) or Weed (a similar implementation but less flexible) will find an optimal balance between creators and consumers, and (hopefully) destroy or at least disrupt the RIAA & co's antiquated business model in the process.

And by the way, iTunes and nearly all the other digital media stores are still doing things the old way - they don't really permit or have any way to take advantage of replication.

- posted by vcmc @  8/21/2004 04:40:00 PM  |  0 comments