Information is not a product
The problem of the proliferation of intellectual property in a digital form, better known as the “copyright problem,” has been stirring the minds of the Internet community for years. And not only the Internet - the big minds of this world also break their heads over how to make a triple out of two, that is, how to give the non-economic essence the taste and smell of an economic commodity.
Why "non-economic"? About this further.
The problem of distribution of digital content in two words in a primitive language is expressed by the phrase "can be copied." In scientific language, this is called "zero replication cost." It is this very zero cost of replication that leads to problems.
I think everyone will agree with me that if a sausage loaf could be copied in the same way as a file, then its value would be zero. The sausage shops and stalls would be meaningless, since only copies that were made for money would have cost, thanks to certain legal restrictions. It would be possible to infinitely introduce laws that would prohibit copying sausages, collect punitive detachments that monitor compliance with the laws, create a special protection of sausages, but all these cordons are unreliable and crumbling with the advent of the first free copy.
')
It is the first free copy that is the barrier that translates information from the product into the essence. To understand this process, let us turn to the definition of the notion “economic theory”.
Economic theory - the science of how people and society choose how to use scarce resources that have multi-purpose value.
I specifically highlighted the keywords. Lack of resources. This is the stumbling block that displays information from the field of science called "economics."
Information ceases to be a commodity at the very moment when it ceases to be a scarce resource. This happens at the moment when the first free copy appears. And the first free copy appears at the moment when it can be made.
Exactly. The appearance of the first free copy is due solely to the ability to make it, and not at all the quality of information.
It should be understood that as soon as information ceases to be a commodity (not abstract "information in general", but specific), it goes beyond the scope of the economy and its regulation becomes impossible by economic methods.
This provision automatically sweeps aside so popular on the Internet ideas for eliminating the problems of digital distribution of content, which, if you exaggerate, sound like this:
1. Information must be free. Free information is information with an initial zero cost of a copy. In the market model of the economy, the creation of such information is possible only from a sense of personal altruism of community members. It is simply impossible to rely on personal altruism in some areas, since for altruism it is impossible to issue any guarantees. That is, the quality of the information produced in this way is extremely unstable (although, potentially, it can be very high).
2. Be sure there will be another economic model that will replace the outdated one. It will not appear, and if you carefully read the previous paragraphs - you already know why. The appearance of the first free copy removes information from the scope of the economy, and economic models for its distribution become inapplicable.
3. You should look for alternative ways of earning, if the main ceases to generate income. Naturally, it should. A writer should stop writing if all his books are downloaded for free. Or, writing exclusively on order is not important, it will be one patron or a group of interested people who can pay for the cost of the work received. The main thing is that the transaction should be carried out before the first free copy appears - then it will be regulated by economic methods. In any case, with such an approach, the mass market will leave - a necessary condition for the possibility of reducing the price of a copy, which means that the final product with the same quality will increase significantly in price. Or, its quality will decline infinitely.
4. It is necessary to move from compulsory to voluntary payment, that is, to donations. Again, in the real world, where there are ninety egoists per altruist, the possibility of a normal salary in such a model is extremely doubtful. Radiohead’s inspirational example was, unfortunately, a flash in the night, and didn’t disperse the darkness of the surrounding area in any way - the authors and musicians who followed in their footsteps noted with bitterness the scanty incomes thus obtained. At best, amounts reached hundreds of dollars. And, of course, the income received in this way is extremely unstable. I'm not even talking about how humiliating for the author is such a model of receiving money.
Since the solution of the problem of digital distribution after receiving the first free copy by economic methods (encouraging good authors with money for the purpose of natural selection - what copyright haters dream of) is impossible, and the time for obtaining such a mass product tends to the time of release of goods, you should look for other methods problem solving You'd be surprised, but they are. There are two ways in this case:
1. Elimination of the possibility of obtaining a free copy, or the maximum increase in the period of time from the release of goods to its receipt. This is what most do. DRM, HASP, StarForce - all these non-economic methods follow this provision. This is what corporations do.
2. Assign responsibility for obtaining a free copy. Legislative regulation. What do the governments of countries.
What can be achieved by destroying these mechanisms? For this, it should be understood that these mechanisms, limiting the possibility of obtaining free copies, transfer information back into the sphere of regulation of the market economy and allow the impact on its production by market methods, that is, it is possible to "vote by ruble." Removing barriers will lead to the destruction of market mechanisms, and all will suffer from this - and consumers who will either have to receive information of inferior quality, or receive information for more value - and manufacturers who will lose markets for income.
I will repeat the main idea in a more understandable form. If a product can be copied for free, then it ceases to be a product, which means that market regulation mechanisms are not applicable to it. That is, the fact that you buy books and music in the online store and you (and your friends) really like it, will not cause your favorite writers and musicians to write more. Moreover, consumer sympathies do not play any role at all, since the authors will in fact keep exclusively on the solvent altruistic stratum of society, which is very few and unstable, which means their position will be very unreliable. Imagine that you will be paid a salary on the principle of a die roll - today is 5 thousand, in a month 90 thousand, and then six months a thousand a month. And you have a wife, a child and a loan for a car ...
What conclusions can be drawn from this? In order for the market regulation of information to be possible, the information should not be free and it should have a non-zero value of the copy. This is something that has not been resolved at the present time, and it is very doubtful that it will succeed - the objective laws of our world come into action. For the same reason, it is impossible to sell air otherwise than by violent means - it is not a commodity and is not subject to economic regulation. So, you should look for economic models that will not concern the distribution of information in digital form in general. However, how to do this for companies whose business is entirely built on digital distribution is an open question.
Why "non-economic"? About this further.
The problem of distribution of digital content in two words in a primitive language is expressed by the phrase "can be copied." In scientific language, this is called "zero replication cost." It is this very zero cost of replication that leads to problems.
I think everyone will agree with me that if a sausage loaf could be copied in the same way as a file, then its value would be zero. The sausage shops and stalls would be meaningless, since only copies that were made for money would have cost, thanks to certain legal restrictions. It would be possible to infinitely introduce laws that would prohibit copying sausages, collect punitive detachments that monitor compliance with the laws, create a special protection of sausages, but all these cordons are unreliable and crumbling with the advent of the first free copy.
')
It is the first free copy that is the barrier that translates information from the product into the essence. To understand this process, let us turn to the definition of the notion “economic theory”.
Economic theory - the science of how people and society choose how to use scarce resources that have multi-purpose value.
I specifically highlighted the keywords. Lack of resources. This is the stumbling block that displays information from the field of science called "economics."
Information ceases to be a commodity at the very moment when it ceases to be a scarce resource. This happens at the moment when the first free copy appears. And the first free copy appears at the moment when it can be made.
Exactly. The appearance of the first free copy is due solely to the ability to make it, and not at all the quality of information.
It should be understood that as soon as information ceases to be a commodity (not abstract "information in general", but specific), it goes beyond the scope of the economy and its regulation becomes impossible by economic methods.
This provision automatically sweeps aside so popular on the Internet ideas for eliminating the problems of digital distribution of content, which, if you exaggerate, sound like this:
1. Information must be free. Free information is information with an initial zero cost of a copy. In the market model of the economy, the creation of such information is possible only from a sense of personal altruism of community members. It is simply impossible to rely on personal altruism in some areas, since for altruism it is impossible to issue any guarantees. That is, the quality of the information produced in this way is extremely unstable (although, potentially, it can be very high).
2. Be sure there will be another economic model that will replace the outdated one. It will not appear, and if you carefully read the previous paragraphs - you already know why. The appearance of the first free copy removes information from the scope of the economy, and economic models for its distribution become inapplicable.
3. You should look for alternative ways of earning, if the main ceases to generate income. Naturally, it should. A writer should stop writing if all his books are downloaded for free. Or, writing exclusively on order is not important, it will be one patron or a group of interested people who can pay for the cost of the work received. The main thing is that the transaction should be carried out before the first free copy appears - then it will be regulated by economic methods. In any case, with such an approach, the mass market will leave - a necessary condition for the possibility of reducing the price of a copy, which means that the final product with the same quality will increase significantly in price. Or, its quality will decline infinitely.
4. It is necessary to move from compulsory to voluntary payment, that is, to donations. Again, in the real world, where there are ninety egoists per altruist, the possibility of a normal salary in such a model is extremely doubtful. Radiohead’s inspirational example was, unfortunately, a flash in the night, and didn’t disperse the darkness of the surrounding area in any way - the authors and musicians who followed in their footsteps noted with bitterness the scanty incomes thus obtained. At best, amounts reached hundreds of dollars. And, of course, the income received in this way is extremely unstable. I'm not even talking about how humiliating for the author is such a model of receiving money.
Since the solution of the problem of digital distribution after receiving the first free copy by economic methods (encouraging good authors with money for the purpose of natural selection - what copyright haters dream of) is impossible, and the time for obtaining such a mass product tends to the time of release of goods, you should look for other methods problem solving You'd be surprised, but they are. There are two ways in this case:
1. Elimination of the possibility of obtaining a free copy, or the maximum increase in the period of time from the release of goods to its receipt. This is what most do. DRM, HASP, StarForce - all these non-economic methods follow this provision. This is what corporations do.
2. Assign responsibility for obtaining a free copy. Legislative regulation. What do the governments of countries.
What can be achieved by destroying these mechanisms? For this, it should be understood that these mechanisms, limiting the possibility of obtaining free copies, transfer information back into the sphere of regulation of the market economy and allow the impact on its production by market methods, that is, it is possible to "vote by ruble." Removing barriers will lead to the destruction of market mechanisms, and all will suffer from this - and consumers who will either have to receive information of inferior quality, or receive information for more value - and manufacturers who will lose markets for income.
I will repeat the main idea in a more understandable form. If a product can be copied for free, then it ceases to be a product, which means that market regulation mechanisms are not applicable to it. That is, the fact that you buy books and music in the online store and you (and your friends) really like it, will not cause your favorite writers and musicians to write more. Moreover, consumer sympathies do not play any role at all, since the authors will in fact keep exclusively on the solvent altruistic stratum of society, which is very few and unstable, which means their position will be very unreliable. Imagine that you will be paid a salary on the principle of a die roll - today is 5 thousand, in a month 90 thousand, and then six months a thousand a month. And you have a wife, a child and a loan for a car ...
What conclusions can be drawn from this? In order for the market regulation of information to be possible, the information should not be free and it should have a non-zero value of the copy. This is something that has not been resolved at the present time, and it is very doubtful that it will succeed - the objective laws of our world come into action. For the same reason, it is impossible to sell air otherwise than by violent means - it is not a commodity and is not subject to economic regulation. So, you should look for economic models that will not concern the distribution of information in digital form in general. However, how to do this for companies whose business is entirely built on digital distribution is an open question.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/91123/
All Articles