I read your posting with interest and offer these comments:
--You idea would require all end users to buy new hardware and all recorders to buy recording technology.
1.The battle between DVD-A and SACD demonstates the antedotal adage about the increase in technology having to be 10 times as good to catch on. Consumers of the hardware have no interest in the producers' copyrights,so you would have to give them the hardware-like a battery company giving away flashlights or a film company giving away film.
2.The laser analog technology to make the recordings could be copied by pirates who could still produce and distribute pirated copies;I must disagree with your assertion that your idea would eliminate piracy. Even if you payed the legal and lobbying fees to get all the treaties and international copyrights,anyone reading the copyright filings would have the wherewithall to copy the technology to make pirated copies. Most governments would balk at this because it would deprive them of sales tax revenues.
3. The problem of artists having to recover a high cost of production to get their work in the marketplace would remain.3a. The problem of producers having to use popular products to subsidize marginal products would remain.
--retailers. A retailer selling music or a movie must price into the product the wholesale step and the capitals,labors,and materials of the location to sell them. He/she must factor in the possibity of ordering too few or too many copies and of returns and defective products.
I have not run the numbers and I've been wrong before but this seems reasonable to me:
--Use the existing technologies to solve piracy,avoiding deplyment of capitals.
--Make the cost of making your own copy of digital software low enough so the incentive for piracy is removed. I chose a download from a digital jukebox,pay a production royalty that is reasonable, bill it to my credit card, and burn the software using my Nero 44.1 burner.The government is happy because they can access the escrow accounts,move the decimal point(sorry) one place,and withhold the taxes due.
The capitals that would otherwise have to go to wholesaling and retail steps and the law enforcement monies could be deployed for more productive uses.
I agree that artist and even producers deserve compensation but believe there are simpler ways to do it than the ways you describe.
Yes,there are some drawbacks to the 44.1 technology above about 22 thousand cycles,but the no upsample technologies show promise,at a cost that does not require everybody to buy new software and hardware.
Thanks.
--You idea would require all end users to buy new hardware and all recorders to buy recording technology.
1.The battle between DVD-A and SACD demonstates the antedotal adage about the increase in technology having to be 10 times as good to catch on. Consumers of the hardware have no interest in the producers' copyrights,so you would have to give them the hardware-like a battery company giving away flashlights or a film company giving away film.
2.The laser analog technology to make the recordings could be copied by pirates who could still produce and distribute pirated copies;I must disagree with your assertion that your idea would eliminate piracy. Even if you payed the legal and lobbying fees to get all the treaties and international copyrights,anyone reading the copyright filings would have the wherewithall to copy the technology to make pirated copies. Most governments would balk at this because it would deprive them of sales tax revenues.
3. The problem of artists having to recover a high cost of production to get their work in the marketplace would remain.3a. The problem of producers having to use popular products to subsidize marginal products would remain.
--retailers. A retailer selling music or a movie must price into the product the wholesale step and the capitals,labors,and materials of the location to sell them. He/she must factor in the possibity of ordering too few or too many copies and of returns and defective products.
I have not run the numbers and I've been wrong before but this seems reasonable to me:
--Use the existing technologies to solve piracy,avoiding deplyment of capitals.
--Make the cost of making your own copy of digital software low enough so the incentive for piracy is removed. I chose a download from a digital jukebox,pay a production royalty that is reasonable, bill it to my credit card, and burn the software using my Nero 44.1 burner.The government is happy because they can access the escrow accounts,move the decimal point(sorry) one place,and withhold the taxes due.
The capitals that would otherwise have to go to wholesaling and retail steps and the law enforcement monies could be deployed for more productive uses.
I agree that artist and even producers deserve compensation but believe there are simpler ways to do it than the ways you describe.
Yes,there are some drawbacks to the 44.1 technology above about 22 thousand cycles,but the no upsample technologies show promise,at a cost that does not require everybody to buy new software and hardware.
Thanks.