3 ms·

What allows for "control the supply"? You can have either physical possession amid physical scarcity (ie, saudie arabia/opec vs oil) or legal means of exclusion

by 001sky 14y ago

What allows for "control the supply"? You can have either physical possession amid physical scarcity (ie, saudie arabia/opec vs oil) or legal means of exclusion amid infitite propogation (ie, abstract possesion of an abstract good). Copyright is necessary but not sufficient step to make a business of the latter. You're implying AP is a failed cartel...and in this yes, you are right. But this also points out why it is being faught for. The quesion is: why is it interesting? And not just a failure...

rayiner 14y ago
Control of supply requires not just a monopoly over some good, but a monopoly over some good that isn't easily fungible. That's why AMD isn't a "monopoly" despite having a monopoly on Opteron processors, or why ARM vendors aren't a cartel despite ARM having a monopoly on ARM processors. Both are easily replaced with competing products. AP only has a monopoly over articles it's affiliated write--but that is a fingible good,messily replaced by news articles from say Reuters.
- 001sky 14y ago
  Agree, but your re-wording the notion of scarcity. you actually can control things that there is limited/tepid demand for. but this is confusing rent-seeking with rent-extracting. eg. in this example: it can be equally true AP is a failed rent extractor, but (is still) an active rent seeker. There is no contradiction.
  - rayiner 14y ago
    Defining the product in question to encompass only AP's content is ridiculous. It's like saying AMD is rent seeking because it controls the supply of Opteron processors.
  - alexqgb 14y ago
    Let's add "rent seeking" to the list of terms you've failed to properly understand. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking You'll note that the defining characteristic of rent seeking behavior is the effort to avoid producing new and valuable work by expending resources petitioning for changes in the regulatory environment instead (e.g. diverting resources from the production of new movies to lobby for retroactive extensions of copyright protection on old movies). In other words, it has a precise, limited meaning and is not a fancy term for "just wanting to charge rent in general". AP going to court to enforce existing laws protecting new work is pretty much the opposite of rent seeking behavior in that (a) they're spending resources to operate within the existing regulatory framework, not petitioning to alter it in their favor and (b) they're doing so in conjunction with the production of new (and presumably) economically valuable work.
    - 001sky 14y ago
      You actually need to understand "economic rents" are first.

by 001sky 14y ago

rayiner 14y ago

Control of supply requires not just a monopoly over some good, but a monopoly over some good that isn't easily fungible. That's why AMD isn't a "monopoly" despite having a monopoly on Opteron processors, or why ARM vendors aren't a cartel despite ARM having a monopoly on ARM processors. Both are easily replaced with competing products. AP only has a monopoly over articles it's affiliated write--but that is a fingible good,messily replaced by news articles from say Reuters.

001sky 14y ago
Agree, but your re-wording the notion of scarcity. you actually can control things that there is limited/tepid demand for. but this is confusing rent-seeking with rent-extracting. eg. in this example: it can be equally true AP is a failed rent extractor, but (is still) an active rent seeker. There is no contradiction.
- rayiner 14y ago
  Defining the product in question to encompass only AP's content is ridiculous. It's like saying AMD is rent seeking because it controls the supply of Opteron processors.
- alexqgb 14y ago
  Let's add "rent seeking" to the list of terms you've failed to properly understand. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_seeking You'll note that the defining characteristic of rent seeking behavior is the effort to avoid producing new and valuable work by expending resources petitioning for changes in the regulatory environment instead (e.g. diverting resources from the production of new movies to lobby for retroactive extensions of copyright protection on old movies). In other words, it has a precise, limited meaning and is not a fancy term for "just wanting to charge rent in general". AP going to court to enforce existing laws protecting new work is pretty much the opposite of rent seeking behavior in that (a) they're spending resources to operate within the existing regulatory framework, not petitioning to alter it in their favor and (b) they're doing so in conjunction with the production of new (and presumably) economically valuable work.
  - 001sky 14y ago
    You actually need to understand "economic rents" are first.