Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Hak Foo]

Silly question, I suppose.

If you're a third-world country, with little exception (maybe India and China have reached the level), you're not generating a lot of value in a domestic copyright industry.  If anything, it's an outflow of hard currency when you have to license foreign-made works, and may reduce net quality of life (the guy selling bootleg DVDs or making iPhanes is providing a valuable service for the domestic market)

So why don't the governments say 'to hell with copyright?'  Yes, I understand enforcement is often erratic, and more as a political token move than a formal policy, but you'd think that some country would say 'hey, if ThePirateBay were hosted on our shores, it would be a revenue source.'

Is it a "we inherited copyright law from our colonial eras" thing?  Or a "the first world bashes us over the head with trade agreements to make sure we have it?"

[artchain]

"Bashing over the head" is certainly part of the answer.  In order to belong to various trade international trade groups, get financial aid, etc, countries need to accept a body of international laws and agreements.

But also remember that even within a country, there are different constituencies.  I have twice had to get legal representation in "third world" countries in order to shut down pirate operations that were stealing my content.  In both cases, the law firms charged something fairly similar to what I would have paid in the US (a fortune by local standards).  I'm sure those law firms are very strong supporters of copyright laws within their countries.

And the pirates?  We got them shut down, but they had no money for damages.  In other words, the guys violating the laws were at the bottom of the social / economic heap.

[JSonnabend]

Artchain, can you give me a call or shoot me an email when you get a chance?  I want to talk to you about your enforcement experiences.

- Jeff

[Isaac]

So why don't the governments say 'to hell with copyright?'

That's a question every developing country should ask.  For example, in the early days of the United States, the US did not respect foreign copyright's at all.

Or a "the first world bashes us over the head with trade agreements to make sure we have it?"

I think this trade agreement bashing is the primary reason.  Also, once a third world company develops its own copyright regime, it will want it's rights respected in other countries.

[Smokin]

Copyrights exists to promote the arts and science. By giving creators of original content a monopoly over their creation, they create an incentive for their civilization to create new original works that they can profit from. Its the financial incentive they are creating to promote the arts and sciences, and as anthropologists have figured out, civilizations thrive with robust scientific and artistic developments.

[Hak Foo]

I guess the question is more, though, 'does it make sense at the place and time these countries are at, though?'  Most of these countries are extraction or agricultural economies, so there's not really a market to foster.

[Smokin]

What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

Before computer technology was created, there was no market for it, nothing was in place to foster a robust newegg.

Copyrights are designed to promote the arts and sciences, not to hinder the sale of bootleg dvds. Is it a good idea to implement incentives to encourage growth in the arts and sciences? Of course it is! Unless you have a country full of Amish, copyrights are a good idea no matter what the current state of the economy is at.....assuming the copyright law is crafted with its original intent in mind of course.

Keep in Mind, in 1790 the United States looked alot like many 3rd world countries do today.

[Isaac]

Keep in Mind, in 1790 the United States looked alot like many 3rd world countries do today.

Sure did.  For the first 100+ years after enacting a federal copyright regime the US found it beneficial to completely ignore copyrights on works created abroad.     

[Hak Foo]

Basic assumption: there is an inherent cost in supporting these laws.  Compliance, enforcement, even drafting and debating 'em. The hope is that they enable more economic development than the costs they incur.  This is simple math, not the emotional 'art is good' or 'science is good' evaluation.

With such reasoning, there is some debate possible if supporting the growth of arts and sciences is a legitimate position.  Especially in a third-world nation, or a banana-republic economy, it may be throwing bad money after good to try to develop an economic sector which has no traction.  Tell me when the Gambia has a company ready to compete with Pixar, or Vanuatu produces the next Microsoft.  (no offense meant to any particular country; merely using them to add snap to the writing)

In the best case, it's like saying 'We think in a few years, our big economic growth will take place in this currently undeveloped region, so let's build the eight-lane superhighway now, so it's ready.'  At worst, it's like trying to grow pineapples in Vladivostok.

In addition, it removes the potential for a piracy-driven economy.  I'd expect that's a niche which could support a small country with the right vision-- "open your factory making fake Rolexes, misspelled prescription drugs (evidently the one I specified for the humour value has been filtered by the forum), and 'OEM Downloadable Software' here, and you can be sure it won't ever be closed because someone whines about IP infringement"  I want to be there when some leader realises that economic model is worth a shot.