More Unintended Consequences
I have just finished reading an interesting blog about Ireland's decision to pay authors royalties on books checked-out of libraries. On the surface this sounds like a good idea, but the Law of Unintended Consequences may rear its ugly head in ways that neither Ireland, nor the blog's author may have foreseen. This is a classic example of Geek vs. Artist.
Firstly, the blog's author goes a step further by putting forward the idea of paying authors a royalty every time a used copy of a book is sold:
"There is no reason an author shouldn't be compensated for a sale of a used copy of their work. It is not a technology issue since the same technology that tracks the sales of new books can track the sale of used ones too."
Again, this sounds like a good idea, but why stop with used books? Why not extend this idea to any work of art? Think about it: painters, sculptors, knitters, quilters, and anyone else who produces "art," should be paid a royalty every time there work is resold. Seems fair, doesn't it?
Why stop at art? Anytime something is resold the manufacturer of that something loses the revenue of an original sale. Every used widget the that is sold means a new widget is un-sold, so why shouldn't we give manufacturers royalties for every re-sale? It would probably be a boon to a beleaguered Detroit. Seems fair, doesn't it?
If books are special because they are art, then all art can be treated the same way.
If books are special because they can be resold, then all resellable items should be treated the same way.
Seems fair, doesn't it?
Post a Comment for "More Unintended Consequences"