Comments on: A Look at Incentives http://blog.copyrightalliance.org/2008/12/a-look-at-incentives/ Copyright Information Fri, 30 Jul 2010 12:47:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Robert Bienstock http://blog.copyrightalliance.org/2008/12/a-look-at-incentives/#comment-8049 Robert Bienstock Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:03:57 +0000 http://blog.copyrightalliance.org/?p=358#comment-8049 There is an important point about the incentive theory that I rarely see mentioned, but I think that it is really crucial. And that is to ask what, specifically, is that activity that the exclusive rights granted by the Constitution supposed to promote. The usual argument is that it promotes creativity: i.e., authors and inventors will create works because the exclusive rights granted by Copyright and Patent shows them that they can profit from their creation. While this is undoubtedly true, it misses an important element of the equation. The fact is that while the profit motive is surely important to many creators, many others also create works of authorship or inventions not to make money but because they have in innate urge to express their creativity. This fact is used by the copyleft to denigrate the incentive model, but the reality is that it is here that we can see what the exclusive rights of Patent and Copyright actually promote: the wider dissemination of these creative works. Because while it is true that many people may chose to paint, write poetry, or tinker with inventions in their garage for the sheer pleasure that they derive from those activities, it is the posibility of financial return from those activities that incentivises the creators to promote their work to the general public and not simply share it with family and friends. Thus the exclusive rights derived from the constitution promote Science and the Useful Arts not just by allowing creators to profit from their work, but by encouraging them to exploit their work by disseminating it as widely as possible, for the maximum profit. And it is equally crucial to point out that while everyone (or, at least, many people) possess a certain degree of creative skill, there are a few extraordinary individuals who have the ability to create tens, hundreds or even more extraordinary works. For these individuals, we, as a society, should want them to be able to support themselves solely through their creative endeavors, so that they can devote their full efforts to creating and not have their creative activities relegated to a mere hobby, as such activities are for most of us. There is an important point about the incentive theory that I rarely see mentioned, but I think that it is really crucial. And that is to ask what, specifically, is that activity that the exclusive rights granted by the Constitution supposed to promote. The usual argument is that it promotes creativity: i.e., authors and inventors will create works because the exclusive rights granted by Copyright and Patent shows them that they can profit from their creation. While this is undoubtedly true, it misses an important element of the equation. The fact is that while the profit motive is surely important to many creators, many others also create works of authorship or inventions not to make money but because they have in innate urge to express their creativity. This fact is used by the copyleft to denigrate the incentive model, but the reality is that it is here that we can see what the exclusive rights of Patent and Copyright actually promote: the wider dissemination of these creative works. Because while it is true that many people may chose to paint, write poetry, or tinker with inventions in their garage for the sheer pleasure that they derive from those activities, it is the posibility of financial return from those activities that incentivises the creators to promote their work to the general public and not simply share it with family and friends. Thus the exclusive rights derived from the constitution promote Science and the Useful Arts not just by allowing creators to profit from their work, but by encouraging them to exploit their work by disseminating it as widely as possible, for the maximum profit.

And it is equally crucial to point out that while everyone (or, at least, many people) possess a certain degree of creative skill, there are a few extraordinary individuals who have the ability to create tens, hundreds or even more extraordinary works. For these individuals, we, as a society, should want them to be able to support themselves solely through their creative endeavors, so that they can devote their full efforts to creating and not have their creative activities relegated to a mere hobby, as such activities are for most of us.

]]>