Copyright is not optimised to foster musical creativity. Discuss this statement with reference to examples.
Since the 1990s numerous researchers have documented how creativity suffers at the hands of corporations that benefit through the exploitation of copyright and trade mark regulations. Giving a copyright owner a virtual monopoly by the prevention of the unauthorized replication and sales of the copyrighted works is an essential evil in attracting financial investments required for the promotion of the creation and circulation of creative works. The implication is that if creative works could be copied without restraint, the unauthorized copies are likely to drive prices below the levels required to induce most music producers from creating new works (Demers, 2006). This is can leave a majority of expensive original works unpublished. This therefore implies that Copyright is not optimized to foster musical creativity and, the prohibition of unauthorized copying can promote benefit and new creations. In numerous media markets today, marketing may be the most important cost. Whilst the musicians’ incomes are considered as the manufacture cost, the charges demanded by the music producers seem to indicate their promotion worth other than their skills. Major music labels spend a lot of money on promotion for a new album as compared to the cost of production. For instance, Michael Jackson at one time complained when Sony spent only twenty five million dollars in marketing his album named invincible (Doctorow, 2008). Thus, because of copyrights, unoriginal works dominate the marketplace to the extent that there is minimal room for the original works.
The presumption behind copyright is that such authorized monopolies are significant in encouraging innovation in the marketplace. The notion is that without that kind of protection no one would see the need of creativity for the reason that others would immediately copy their original works. This was based on presumption, however many have continued to believe that this is true. Most significantly, as copyright piracy impedes the communication of consumer preferences to music artists. In addition, an increased number of musicals are established to accommodate the tastes of the entrepreneurs such as the sponsors and advertisers instead of the listeners, and this has resulted in a significant shift in the creative process of most of the music industry (Doctorow, 2008). Even though the entrepreneurs are supposed to readily take what is trendy in the industry to inspire their own productivity, the expectations of the entrepreneurs and the listeners do not always meet in a dynamic marketplace. Because of this, the concerns of less business-related musicians and the upcoming musicians are compromised.
Extensive piracy has caused fans to undervalue musical works which has resulted in the under development of the music industry with the artists becoming less motivated to be creative. The extensive level of copyright piracy discourages creativity as it leads to significant undervaluation of the musical works in the market (Day, 2013). In the digital era, users are exposed to free music from numerous illegitimate sources. It has stopped to be a feasible business model that relies mainly on record sales when users can pay minimal for musical works. Music artists have to look for other means of making a living, which discourages them from being more creative. With the copied works, the copyright owners have to reduce the price of their legitimate products for the purpose of competing with the copied products (Demers, 2006). Increased price competition usually implies increased cost cutting. Because of this, the copyright owners usually end up investing less in music production, which in turn affects the variety and the quality of their musical works. This one of the reasons why music copying, a palpable way of cutting creation costs, has become a very common scandal regardless of the fact that the threshold for copying is reasonably very prominent in the pop culture.
Copyright is increasingly more concerned with preserving business models than prevention of piracy. Discuss this statement with reference to examples.
The role of numerous businesses presently is limited to production, promotion as well as the sale of the various works. Given the critical significance of alternative revenue channels in the era of increasing piracy, many companies are restructuring their business models to become more like the talented management organizations that handle and distribute revenues from various aspects of the entertainment-associated businesses. Different from the U.S, where peer to peer file distribution is apparently the main source of unauthorized works, other countries face a wider variety of infringements whereby search engines contributes greatly in encouraging online piracy. For example, the Chinese Baidu search engine, being the largest in the marketplace offers an online music service based on a business model of deep linking unauthorized music files positioned on the intermediary website. Once a search keyword is entered, a list of search results is generated that shows the available works organized in a particular way. One can then obtain the chosen works instantly from the website (Day, 2013).
Those supporting copyright defend the practice of making the originally published works accessible to a wider market. For instance a number of the Zine editors are now encouraging their readers to copy and circulate their works emphasizing that they write mainly for the purpose of sharing their ideas with lovers of their works and not as a means of earning a living (Jenkins, 2013). Without considering piracy and its effects on the originally published work, it is believed that most original works gain popularity because of the extensive distribution (McCardle, 2003). Whilst a few of the media and Telco companies are trying to do away with the overall neutrality for the purpose of serving their short term interests, their concerns are not shared by all. As a number of businesses are gradually getting used to the most current wave of piracy, many are beginning to acknowledge that this is not a battle but a form of competition that inspires them to be more creative.
Piracy is currently considered as a business form. The digital uprising has brought about a consumer coup. It is believed that it is significant to not only make in-demand but also make it on demand. If suing users for utilizing pirate copies becomes a major concern to a company’s business model, then it is considered that that particular company does not have a competitive business model (Mason, 2008). An organization’s capabilities to sell is supposed to be based on their capability of innovating and creating value and not to lawsuits, though for others the lawsuits are key business plans. Such companies do not consider inventing or even making anything but rather, purchase patents that already exist. They then track down the business utilizing those ideas and extort money from them through having them sued (Day, 2013).
Day, B. (2013). In Defense of Copyright: Record Labels, Creativity, and the Future of Music. Seton Hall Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law, 21(1), 2.
Demers, J. T. (2006). Steal this music: How intellectual property law affects musical creativity. University of Georgia Press.
Doctorow, C. (2008). Selected essays on technology, creativity, copyright and the future of the future. Acceded of: http://www. jus. uio. no/sisu/content. cory_doctorow/portrait. a5. pdf.
Jenkins, H. (2013). Textual poachers: Television fans and participatory culture. Routledge.
Mason’s, M. (2008). Pirate’s Dilemma.
McCardle, M. (2003). Fan fiction, fandom, and fanfare: What’s all the fuss. BUJ Sci. & Tech. L., 9, 433.