[pp.int.general] cultural flatrate: PP position?
r.bakels at planet.nl
Tue Jun 2 17:52:02 CEST 2009
> But not everyone is a valuable creator. Take cc licensed music. Really
Copyright nowadays refrains from making judgements on quality. The only
criterion is originality, and this threshold is very low. Often only
"statistical" originality is advocated = would it be different if you would
ask someone else to write on the same topic (e.g. a users manual for a
And I like that! Because it helps the "reduction ad absurdum" approach I
advocated in a previous post.
>> In a day
>> where everybody is a creator, the "flatrate" concept fails to answer the
>> most basic question: "Who should be compensated for what and why?".
In addition to that: note that "skill & labour" is only recognised in UK
patent law as a reason - but flatrate debates assume this as an "obvious"
> The simpliest way would to take the same key as with media like tapes,
> cds, copy machines, ... Some (rightholders) will profit more from the
> system than others. But no system has ever been fair for everyone...
Stop! That is the reason to defend a flatrate system. If such a system is
accepted at all, it should logically be qualified as a tax system. If I buy
a piece of berad, I pay 6% VAT, which may be used for *any* purpose, and no
questions are asked about any relationship between the origin of the tax,
and the way it is spent. But taxes call for democratic control. One of the
most basic reasons for democracy is - I said it before - "no taxation
More information about the pp.international.general