June, 2008

Copyright and Innovation

by Timothy B. Lee
The Conversation
June 30th, 2008

The “business models” we should be concerned about are not only those concerned with the creation of music and movies, but also with the development of new technologies for manipulating sound and video. A copyright policy that gives content creators veto power over technological innovation may marginally deter file sharing (I have my doubts) but it will also dramatically affect the pace of innovation in digital media devices.

Read: Copyright and Innovation

Copyright’s Losers

by Tom W. Bell
The Conversation
June 26th, 2008

Perhaps copyright law can avoid favoring one art form over another. It cannot, however, avoid picking winners and losers.

Read: Copyright’s Losers

Picking Winners

by Doug Lichtman
The Conversation
June 24th, 2008

I think copyright law should do what it can to accommodate as many business models as plausible. So if new technology can lead to a rebirth of local live performances, copyright law should try to support those efforts. And if Paramount thinks that there is still room for the major motion picture even now, copyright law should again endeavor to leave that door open.

Read: Picking Winners

Movies: Major Art or Minor art?

by Rasmus Fleischer
The Conversation
June 24th, 2008

Any intelligent discussion about copyright and movies must carefully define what it is that the law should safeguard. Is it the artistic use of moving pictures in general, or is it the format of big-budget feature films under conditions established in the last century?

Read: Movies: Major Art or Minor art?