Posted: Jun 19th 2003, 5:31 am
Nearly two years ago, columnist Ilana Mercer debated the Napster case and legal protections for intellectual property rights:
http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=90
Personally, I can see how some people get screwed in the short term, but in the long term, I'm not too worried about this sort of thing. If IP protection laws remain in place and artists and record companies continue to raise prices, eventually the customers will stop buying, and prices will come down. On the other hand, if file-sharing and other boot-legging pulls the rug out from under the artists and labels, eventually they will stop making the music, and the customers will start paying again. Either way, the market fixes itself. Governmental red tape, media monopolies, IP thieves, and other forces may temporarily alter the balance one way or another, but they cannot alter basic economic principles.
http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=90
Personally, I can see how some people get screwed in the short term, but in the long term, I'm not too worried about this sort of thing. If IP protection laws remain in place and artists and record companies continue to raise prices, eventually the customers will stop buying, and prices will come down. On the other hand, if file-sharing and other boot-legging pulls the rug out from under the artists and labels, eventually they will stop making the music, and the customers will start paying again. Either way, the market fixes itself. Governmental red tape, media monopolies, IP thieves, and other forces may temporarily alter the balance one way or another, but they cannot alter basic economic principles.