Global License: Difference between revisions

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
'''The Global License''', a translation from the French "license globale" which was recently proposed as a new copyright legislation, '''would legalise filesharing but monitor use, with government taxation distributed amongst the artists'''.
'''The Global License''', a translation from the French "license globale" which was recently proposed as a new copyright legislation, '''would legalise filesharing but monitor use, with government taxation distributed amongst the artists'''.


Line 10: Line 9:


[[Category:Encyclopedia]]
[[Category:Encyclopedia]]
[[Category:Business]]

Revision as of 10:01, 25 February 2006

The Global License, a translation from the French "license globale" which was recently proposed as a new copyright legislation, would legalise filesharing but monitor use, with government taxation distributed amongst the artists.

In the U.S., it is defended as an alternative by Terry Fisher, author of the book Promises To Keep:

"...we should consider a fundamental change in approach.... replace major portions of the copyright and encryption-reinforcement models with a variant of....a governmentally administered reward system. In brief, here’s how such a system would work. A creator who wished to collect revenue when his or her song or film was heard or watched would register it with the Copyright Office. With registration would come a unique file name, which would be used to track transmissions of digital copies of the work. The government would raise, through taxes, sufficient money to compensate registrants for making their works available to the public. Using techniques pioneered by American and European performing rights organizations and television rating services, a government agency would estimate the frequency with which each song and film was heard or watched by consumers. Each registrant would then periodically be paid by the agency a share of the tax revenues proportional to the relative popularity of his or her creation. Once this system were in place, we would modify copyright law to eliminate most of the current prohibitions on unauthorized reproduction, distribution, adaptation, and performance of audio and video recordings. Music and films would thus be readily available, legally, for free.

Painting with a very broad brush...., here would be the advantages of such a system. Consumers would pay less for more entertainment. Artists would be fairly compensated. The set of artists who made their creations available to the world at large--and consequently the range of entertainment products available to consumers--would increase. Musicians would be less dependent on record companies, and filmmakers would be less dependent on studios, for the distribution of their creations. Both consumers and artists would enjoy greater freedom to modify and redistribute audio and video recordings. Although the prices of consumer electronic equipment and broadband access would increase somewhat, demand for them would rise, thus benefiting the suppliers of those goods and services. Finally, society at large would benefit from a sharp reduction in litigation and other transaction costs." (http://www.futureofthebook.org/blog/archives/2006/02/can_there_be_co.html)