News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Supreme Court rules Georgia state law annotations not copyrightable [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:Supreme Court rules Georgia state law annotations not cop... by ineedasername on Monday April 27, 2020 @07:17PM (#23001326)
But why would the fee be quite large? Who would pay such a large fee when immediately after they publish the book, rival publishers who paid nothing could print their own versions. Even if it was a kickstarter model with decentralized payments from individuals, a large number of people would simply wait until the kickstarter was over and the book published to get it for free. Imagin that was the case with kickstarters now: How many people would pre-pay for products that have no quarantee of delivery if they knew that waiting would earn them the item for free? Again, even if there was a guarantee the product would be finished, those who wait would still get it for free.

I'm not saying this couldn't work, in theory, but I think in practice that the # of parasites has the potential to make such a model unworkable. But maybe not! I'd be perfectly happy if you're right and it worked.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules Georgia state law annotations not cop... by zozbot234 on Monday April 27, 2020 @07:26PM (#23001419)
The entire point of the Kickstarter model is to solve collective action problems of that kind. It's in the individual's interest to contribute, because otherwise the project might not reach its funding threshold, or might have trouble reaching the 'stretch' goal that some care about. This ensures that the 'funding' issue is solved, at least.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules Georgia state law annotations not cop... by azernik on Monday April 27, 2020 @10:09PM (#23002606)
Who would be contributing to this Kickstarter? People who already know her, and know that her books are good? That's not where the real money is, or the measurement of market value of an author's labor; the money is in the flow of cash from consumers.

More generally, non-excludable goods do not work well within a free market system. If you want them produced, you either set up a state mechanism for funding them (which many countries do for e.g. film, by creating national film funds), or you somehow make them excludable (e.g. through copyright). The other options aren't really effective.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules Georgia state law annotations not cop... by zozbot234 on Monday April 27, 2020 @10:32PM (#23002723)
You're pointing to an information problem that has little to do with non-excludability. A prospective funder faces the exact same issue anyway! And crowdfunding has been used to fund many sorts of good/service provision where non-rivalry is an issue. It does appear to work quite a bit better than other market-based options.
[ Parent | on HN ]