Friday, June 19, 2009

Researchers conclude piracy not stifling content creation

An interesting look by Ars Technica at the effect (or lack thereof) of piracy on music creation.

I have long said that the purpose of copyright law should (and was, you know, like in the Constitution) be about "promoting the progress of science and the useful arts" and only incidentally about supporting artists and their families.

I don't care about the livelihood of artists. I really don't, and neither should you. I mean, people not starving to death is always cool, but it doesn't really affect me if some random musician gets paid or not. What I do care about is that new music that I like gets produced. If new music that I like is being produced, as long as it is not created by child slavery or prostitution or something, I really couldn't care less whether the artists are granted monopolies on their creations or the music is created on communes where everyone is forced to use the communal toilet to fertilize the glorious communist fields.

Congress only has the power to "promote the progress of science and the useful arts," and if the current copyright system fails to do this, as this and other articles argue, then that system is unconstitutional.