Two signs of the times - we need copyright reform!
This became clear yesterday when an arbitration panel concluded that it is legal and reasonable for USB sticks and hard disks to be subject to a penalty. This is because someone might save a perfectly legal copy of a copyrighted work on a stick or hard drive. Does it feel modern? Does it fit with how we consume digital culture today? Tomorrow? Is it possible to distribute such fees fairly between different copyright holders? Is there any serious economist at all who sees this remuneration model as functional?
Number two. Today, the proposal for the implementation of the EU Directive on the term extension of protection for musical works arrived on our desk. The monopoly on musical works will be extended from 50 to 70 years.
Friends of order may wonder what is the main purpose of copyright? To stimulate creativity. With that in mind, one might ask whether long terms of protection encourage more creative expression and innovation. Does three quarters of a century of protection motivate an artist to create new works? How many artists live even 70 years after the work was created? Or is it in fact more reasonable to introduce shorter terms of protection in an era of ever-increasing choice and availability of creative content? Would it make it easier for artists, both professional and those who, to borrow Larry Lessig's phrase, "create for the love of music", to be inspired by and share each other's work?
These are just two expressions of how the current copyright system does not work in a modern information economy. It does not support cultural consumers, fewer of whom access culture by buying or making copies. It does not support creativity, as it does not take into account how artists as well as amateurs access, are inspired by and borrow new creative expressions and innovations(the remix culture, which has always existed but is thriving with the help of the web). And, it does not support growth, either in the creative sector or in the companies that develop services and products that support new, innovative ways of accessing and creating culture.
So who is the system actually good for?
Those with the power to change the current order should ask themselves what has greater protection value - culture or the copyright system itself.