Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!ANDREW.CMU.EDU!pz1q+
From: pz1q+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU ("W. Paul Zahray")
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Rewarding Researchers Without Restricting Copying
Message-ID: 
Date: 22 Jun 88 12:55:44 GMT
References: <10777@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 60

I have enjoyed the recent post and discussion on rewarding researchers without
restricting copying.
I agree that the existing copyright system is far from optimal in determining
who uses what and with what cost (reward).

Comments on Hans' proposal (ISA):
It may not be possible to avoid subsidizing information for hardware by sellers
who are not members.  For example, if IBM is a member, then software fro IBM
PC's will be subsidized.  If a maker of a cheap IBM clone decides not to join
ISA (whats in it for him?), you have trouble.

This in part answers my next question, can ISA work without government
participation?

An interesting issue to explore is the boundaries of what types of information
would and would not fall into the general subsidized domain.  On one side,
specialized programs (or information in general) for a single or small class of
users could be treated and sold by their creator as proprietary information at
high prices, just like now.  (In the limit, if a company writes a program for
their internal use, they clearly should not be obligated to share it through
ISA.  Similarly, if two or three companies jointly underwrite development of a
specialized package, ...)  With a high ticket item and a small group of
potential users, it is certainly easier for the developer to prevent
unauthorized copying than in the general case.  I think this answers the
critisisms that with ISA the incentive to produce highly specialized products
will disappear.

I think the worse boundary problem is on the other end, with material currently
distributed in printed form (books, etc) which is now becoming useful in
electronic form.  In printed form a piece of information is sold on a fee per
copy basis, with copying fairly difficult (photocopying costs real money, and
then there is postage and delay if distance is involved.  In electronic form,
the same information if in the ISA pool will be available free to the user (he
already paid his dues).  This would provide quite an impetus for people to
switch to using the electronic form.  If I were a publisher, I would be real
leary of putting any of my books into the ISA pool when (1) I had only a wild
guess how much I would collect from ISA and (2) I suspected the move would
dramatically cut my traditional printed form sales, which were my source of
income.

Publishers are already very uneasy about making their wares available in
electronic form, and the ISA scenario could make this worse.  If it discourages
people from making information available in electronic form, ISA has failed.

In context of all the books in the world being available in the ISA pool, the
remark about ISA maintaining an online library of all subsidized information
accessible from major networks is intriguing.  This could be a serious
technical undertaking, and perhaps require all of the ISA budget or more.  The
benefits, of course, are mind-boggling.  Comments, anyone??

For the really curious, the Office of Technology Assessment (your tax dollars
at work) recently put out a report called "Intellectual Property in an Age of
Electronics and Information" or something similar, and its fairly good.  Also
of interest, a number of countries (not including the U.S.) have "Public
Lending Right" laws where authors are payed for each time one of their books
circulates from a public library.  In general, I believe that educational
institution libraries are exempt, and that the amounts of money payed out are
fairly small.

Paul Zahray