3 ms·
Musicians and artists in general had careers before artificial scarcity (read: Copyright/IP) existed, so that's false (the usual path was via a patron of arts).
by sgift 3y ago
Musicians and artists in general had careers before artificial scarcity (read: Copyright/IP) existed, so that's false (the usual path was via a patron of arts). Now, we can discuss whether artificial scarcity allowed them to have better careers. Or careers which could be planned better than before. And whether that upside weighs higher than the downsides of copyright.
- acdha 3y agoThat’s true, actually, since this is in the context of recordings. Prior to sound recordings becoming available musicians were reliably in demand because anyone who wanted to listen to music had to have a human play it. Copying another person’s work required a person with considerable skill and either permission or willingness to use someone else’s work. Recordings completely change that and would absolutely have been a disaster without some kind of IP laws because people would’ve been competing against a now unlimited supply of recordings. That doesn’t mean we have the perfect balance of rules but we need something.
- sinkasapa 3y agoI think this is true for the sciences as well but it is more evident in math. Mathematicians could hypothetically exist in a system where they are funded by artificial scarcity. I don't know how practical that is but they tend to exist in a more patronage-like system. Outside of a number of areas of math that have applications where people will pay for their services, mathematical research is primarily a "patronage" system, where society is willing to pay for pure mathematical research at universities. There are a lot of examples of this in society.