We could do without record companies entirely. Record companies … distribute pre-recorded copies of music … But listeners making copies for themselves or their friends do not consume this service; they use only the work of the musicians and composers … We can promote music more effectively by making any one musician’s share of the tax revenues taper off as copies increase. For example, we could calculate an “adjusted number of copies” beyond which revenue increases more slowly than the actual number, following a prescribed mathematical function. The effect of tapering off will be to spread the money more widely, supporting more musicians at an adequate standard of living. This encourages diversity, as copyright was supposed to do.
Predictor: Stallman, Richard
Prediction, in context:In a 1993 article for Wired magazine, Richard Stallman, president of the Free Software Foundation, head of the GNU project and a MacArthur Foundation fellow, writes: ”A new law recently passed by Congress … taxes each unit and each tape or recordable disc sold to consumers. The tax funds are handed out to various participants in the music industry … The stated purpose of the law is to ‘compensate’ musicians for home copying. But the law diverts 57 percent of the funds to record companies and music publishers, leaving less than half for the people who participate in the creative process. Most of the remaining funds will go to musical superstars and thus do little to encourage or assist musical creativity. Meanwhile, users are denied the full power of digital technology: easier copying and changing of information … If the purpose of the music tax is to better support musicians and composers, then all the money collected should go to them – not just a fraction. They are the ones who truly make music. In principle, we could do without record companies entirely. Record companies do provide one useful service: they distribute pre-recorded copies of music. This service is widely used and it is right that the purchasers of pre-recorded copies should pay for it. But listeners making copies for themselves or their friends do not consume this service; they use only the work of the musicians and composers … We can promote music more effectively by making any one musician’s share of the tax revenues taper off as copies increase. For example, we could calculate an ‘adjusted number of copies’ beyond which revenue increases more slowly than the actual number, following a prescribed mathematical function. The effect of tapering off will be to spread the money more widely, supporting more musicians at an adequate standard of living. This encourages diversity, as copyright was supposed to do.”
Date of prediction: January 1, 1993
Topic of prediction: Controversial Issues
Subtopic: Copyright/Intellectual Property/Plagiarism
Name of publication: Wired
Title, headline, chapter name: Copywrong
Quote Type: Direct quote
Page number or URL of document at time of study:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.03/1.3_stallman.copyright_pr.html
This data was logged into the Elon/Pew Predictions Database by: Anderson, Janna Quitney