Difference between revisions of "Liebowitz and Watt (2006)"

From Copyright EVIDENCE
 
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Authentic Link=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2006.00259.x/abstract
 
|Authentic Link=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2006.00259.x/abstract
 
|Link=https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jecsur/v20y2006i4p513-545.html
 
|Link=https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jecsur/v20y2006i4p513-545.html
|Reference=Belinfante and Davis (1979); Hui and Png (2003); Bounie et al. (2005); Maffioletti and Ramello (2004);
+
|Reference=Belinfante and Davis (1979); Hui and Png (2003); Maffioletti and Ramello (2004); Bounie et al. (2005);
 
|Plain Text Proposition=Although creative efforts in the realm of music are going ahead in spite of the existence of copying, the magnitudes of the estimated losses due to copying are likely to cause serious dislocations in the market.
 
|Plain Text Proposition=Although creative efforts in the realm of music are going ahead in spite of the existence of copying, the magnitudes of the estimated losses due to copying are likely to cause serious dislocations in the market.
 
We have noted that all of the possible alternatives are likely second-best solutions to the problem of efficient creation and distribution of information products, where the market failure based on copying renders the first-best solution unworkable.
 
We have noted that all of the possible alternatives are likely second-best solutions to the problem of efficient creation and distribution of information products, where the market failure based on copying renders the first-best solution unworkable.
Line 16: Line 16:
 
|Discipline=L8: Industry Studies: Services, L82: Entertainment • Media
 
|Discipline=L8: Industry Studies: Services, L82: Entertainment • Media
 
|Intervention-Response=The possibilities that seem most likely to provide some ameliorative impact are DRM and taxes on blank supports. If there are better business models (using bundling) the industry should be able to discover these on its own. Theories based on network effects, on tipping, or auctions seem most unlikely to provide useful guidance. Nevertheless, some of these alternatives are debateable to say the least, in the sense that they may or may not be politically and legally feasible, mainly due to the adverse effects that they imply for the rights of others (above all, music consumers and non-copiers).
 
|Intervention-Response=The possibilities that seem most likely to provide some ameliorative impact are DRM and taxes on blank supports. If there are better business models (using bundling) the industry should be able to discover these on its own. Theories based on network effects, on tipping, or auctions seem most unlikely to provide useful guidance. Nevertheless, some of these alternatives are debateable to say the least, in the sense that they may or may not be politically and legally feasible, mainly due to the adverse effects that they imply for the rights of others (above all, music consumers and non-copiers).
|Description of Data=The author analyzes the different methodologies used in the existing literature that has examined the impact of file sharing on sales of sound recordings, focussing on three methodologies: using countries or cities as the unit of analysis, using records as the unit of analysis and using surveys.
+
|Description of Data=The authors analyze the different methodologies used in the existing literature that has examined the impact of file sharing on sales of sound recordings, focussing on three methodologies: using countries or cities as the unit of analysis, using records as the unit of analysis and using surveys.
 
|Data Year=Not stated
 
|Data Year=Not stated
 
|Data Type=Primary and Secondary data
 
|Data Type=Primary and Secondary data

Latest revision as of 11:01, 23 November 2016

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Liebowitz and Watt (2006)
Title: How to best ensure remuneration for creators in the market for music? Copyright and its alternatives
Author(s): Liebowitz, S. J., Watt, R.
Year: 2006
Citation: Liebowitz, S. J., & Watt, R. (2006). How to best ensure remuneration for creators in the market for music? Copyright and its alternatives. Journal of Economic Surveys, 20(4), 513-545.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by: Kretschmer (2011)
About the Data
Data Description: The authors analyze the different methodologies used in the existing literature that has examined the impact of file sharing on sales of sound recordings, focussing on three methodologies: using countries or cities as the unit of analysis, using records as the unit of analysis and using surveys.
Data Type: Primary and Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: Yes
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • Not stated
Funder(s):

Abstract

The focus of this essay is to examine the market for copyrighted works with a particular emphasis on the sound recording market. This market is currently in a state of flux, some would say disarray, due to the ability of the Internet to lower transmission costs for both authorized and unauthorized copies, with the latter being, at this time, far more prevalent. In this essay we discuss the intent of copyright, the role of copying and file-sharing, and some alternative production/consumption schemes meant to strengthen or to replace copyright.

Main Results of the Study

Although creative efforts in the realm of music are going ahead in spite of the existence of copying, the magnitudes of the estimated losses due to copying are likely to cause serious dislocations in the market. We have noted that all of the possible alternatives are likely second-best solutions to the problem of efficient creation and distribution of information products, where the market failure based on copying renders the first-best solution unworkable.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The possibilities that seem most likely to provide some ameliorative impact are DRM and taxes on blank supports. If there are better business models (using bundling) the industry should be able to discover these on its own. Theories based on network effects, on tipping, or auctions seem most unlikely to provide useful guidance. Nevertheless, some of these alternatives are debateable to say the least, in the sense that they may or may not be politically and legally feasible, mainly due to the adverse effects that they imply for the rights of others (above all, music consumers and non-copiers).



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Green-tick.png
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets