From: ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 93 17:49:10 PST
To: Marc.Ringuette@GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Re: Tagging copyrighted text
In-Reply-To: <9302102305.AA29462@toad.com>
Message-ID: <9302110148.AA26737@longs.lance.colostate.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>Tim May and many of us argue that copyrights will become unenforceable 
>as copying bits becomes cheaper and crypto privacy and anonymity becomes
>more widely available.  This will mean that any static collection of
>bits will just be FREE.  Musicians will have to make money on live
>performances, because they couldn't sell many recordings.  Etc.

Er, I'd say this is another instance of cypherpunk extremism: ``The
world as we know it is about to collapse.''  Yes, information will
probably be much freer over the nets, and copyright violations probably
more difficult to pursue and punish.  But think about this: with the
speed and ubiquity of networks, it now becomes possible for every
author or creative artist to keep the only copies of his work. Then, he
could post "links" to it anywhere in the world. When people pass around
the work, they wouldn't pass around the work itself, they'd pass the
"link".  Whenever someone wants to view the work, the link points to
the unchanging address for instantaneous downloading.  A very small
transaction charge is billed to the receiver by the sender. (Of course,
people could write stuff that would actually grab and store the text or
whatever instead of just "play" it. But I'll bet that most people will
eventually say, "why bother?" The direct access will be more convenient
and the charge so minimal.)  Links could be embedded wherever there is
information, like in bibliographies or references or compilations or whatever.

 There are virtually NO MIDDLEMEN---the investment return to the artist
is total.  Contrast this to today's vast overhead with records and
books, for example (these costs are largely associated with
distribution, I'd wager).  Of course, the individual artist is free to
make contracts with knowledgeable cohorts for album cover design or
whatever.  The essence of a copyright is really to give a creative
artist more control over their own works, and global, high-speed,
reliable networks will give artists absolutely unprecedented and
unparalleled control (and yes, I admit, a lack of it too).

Hey, consider that programmers are artists too.  I write some hot
program, but I don't distribute it: I run it on one of my systems as a
sort of network pipe.  People anywhere in the world pipe in their data
and get it back with a small transaction fee to me.  In fact, what I'm
really getting at is treating the entire world like Unix utilities with
standard input and output, sort of like electronic vending machines!  I
can pipe my manuscripts to some address and they pop out edited or
published.  I drop a file on that goofy icon, and it goes to Bill
Clinton.  I could hook up pipes between companies to set up my own
company!  There might be a lot of command line parameters to specify
and plenty of glitches reported on stderr, but it could work...  This
all would happen with commensurate drains on my online account (all
digital transactions, of course).  Imagine that you could write
software that would bill the user!  Big companies do it, why not individuals?