Horse,

>
> Why do we want (or need) to move to an information based economy?!? Is
> this a real need or is it a created need - i.e. created by those that
> stand to profit by it to the detriment of those that don't.

Tuukka:
Obviously, in the values of economy, it is better to have more money
instead of not having more money or having less money. The information
sector is one of the few industries that is actually still growing and
creating jobs. It's no religion of computer nerds. It simply works, but
currently existing large corporations want to destroy something that
would render them mostly obsolete if it were allowed to grow into a
large industry.

However, in the absence of legal obstacles, these information based
services would replace the current outdated business models organically
and without requiring other kinds of interference than that of consumers
favoring business models that serve them better. The SOPA/PIPA uproar is
essentially about whether we favor stagnant business models and refusal
to innovate instead of consumers, innovation and new businesses. That's
why we want and need to move to an information based economy, and will
actually do so unless forcefully prevented.

We do not need to move to an information based economy if we don't want
to. But that means piracy will make people have information for free. So
basically the stagnant old world is trying to shoot down legal business
models which would remove or alleviate the need for piracy, because they
would have the side-effect of also removing the need for the outdated
business models!

Horse:
> It seems to me that the main recipients of the benefits of an
> information based economy are those that do the least in order to gain
> the most.

Tuukka:
If we don't have much information based economy, we will have piracy and
information available for free. I don't exactly have a problem with
that, but most people won't agree to that. What people could conceivably
agree to is to never allow laws like SOPA or PIPA to pass.

I don't know why you think information based economy has inert people
reaping the profit. CS and IT are very hard work, with lots of
competition and businesses falling and new ones appearing. Do you
actually know what kind of work it is? But I do agree programs like
Windows and Photoshop are probably too expensive.

> Here's an example:
> Musicians are the artists that create a 'consumable product' - i.e.
> music. The vast majority of musicians get little more than a tiny
> fraction of the proceeds of their endeavours and yet a multi-billion
> dollar industry revolves around what they produce. Most artists don't
> even own the IP that is being fought over in SOPA/PIPA.

Tuukka:

I don't get it. What do you mean by "information based economy"? That
selling audio CD:s in a store already is information based economy?
Well... sure, but in that case we have already had information based
economy for a long time. Centuries, actually, since this also includes
books.

Musicians who live by making art generally make the profit of live
performances, not of record sales. Besides, the average income of
musicians has constantly increased during the last decade or so despite
allegations of piracy destroying art:
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/90751/study-musicians-income-up-66-despite-decreased-album-sales/

Horse:
>
> IP, like money, has a place in the world but it is not the be-all and
> end-all of existence. A balanced economy - one that has both real
> world and digital world good - makes more sense than an economy based
> solely or mainly on one or the other.

Tuukka:
Meaning... what? Nobody is suggesting that because we are moving towards
an information based economy, food will become free. It's not like we're
actually even "moving". We are just expanding to the information
dimension, and as a result, the real world dimension begins to appear
proportionally smaller despite neither growing nor becoming smaller to
any significant extent.


The Register:
> Former Mozilla CEO John Lilly captured
<http://john.jubjubs.net/2012/01/06/whats-bothering-me-about-the-sopa-discussion/>
this best, arguing, "What’s extremely discouraging to me right now is
that I don’t really see how we [the tech world and the US Congress] can
have a nuanced, technically-informed, respectful
discussion/debate/conversation/working relationship."



Tuukka:
Respect isn't something people get automatically. The point of having
respect is that under certain circumstances, incompetence may lead to
loss of respect.

The Congress did not give due respect to the tech world in the first
place. This is why we couldn't have a technically-informed discussion.
Looking for scapegoats? There are plenty... such as the media, which has
not taught citizens about the importance of the tech world and copyright
issues, so the common public has not been able to vote the right people
to represent them in the senate and congress. And so on. There's no one
culprit, but the tech world needs more respect from everyone simply
because if they don't give that respect, they will mess up their own
matters in addition to messing up the tech world.

-Tuukka
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html