[pp.int.general] cultural flatrate: PP position?

[Reinier Bakels]

> 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 
vacuum cleaner).
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" 
given.

> 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 
without representation".

reinier