[HN Gopher] Z-Library Responds to U.S. Crackdown, Asks Authors f...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Z-Library Responds to U.S. Crackdown, Asks Authors for Forgiveness
        
       Author : picture
       Score  : 15 points
       Date   : 2022-11-21 20:51 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (torrentfreak.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (torrentfreak.com)
        
       | dredmorbius wrote:
       | What Z-Library and similar systems offer is a relief from the
       | _tremendous_ deadweight losses of a legacy and increasingly
       | inexcusable private copyright regime, _one which has been
       | tremendously expanded over the lifetime of many of the works
       | presently alleged to be infringing_.
       | 
       | As Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz has written,
       | _knowledge is a global public good_.[1] And public goods
       | inevitably result in market failure. _Information and markets
       | simply don 't work._
       | 
       | The classic way to pay for public goods is through a tax, or tax-
       | like, general assessment, preferably indexed by income or
       | household wealth.
       | 
       | As I've noted several times here recently,[2] the $9 billion in
       | annual bookstore sales[3] could be met with a $5.25 per month fee
       | for a typical U.S. household, or an 0.1% income tax basis (say,
       | rolled into your broadband access charge).
       | 
       | This would provide compensation equal to _all current book
       | sales,_ and avoid both the deadweight losses of information
       | access denial of the present system as well as the Federal Crime
       | of Letting People Read by which the so-called US Justice system
       | assassinated Aaron Swartz.[4]
       | 
       | As jl2618 recently noted,[5] Criminalisation of digital
       | distribution was only legislated in 2008 as 17 USC 506 (again in
       | the U.S.), under Public Law 110--403:
       | 
       | https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/506
       | 
       | https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-110publ403/pdf/PLAW...
       | 
       | A small, progressive, integrated fee _would address the grossly
       | specious complaint that "authors must be paid"_.
       | 
       | Yes, _pay them,_ and decriminalise knowledge access.
       | 
       | I've noted much of this before, including:
       | 
       | "A Modest Proposal: Universal Online Media Payment Syndication"
       | (2014)
       | <https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1uotb3/a_modes...>
       | (I've since suggested that broadband service providers act as the
       | gateway for revenue collection.)
       | 
       | "What the academic publishing industry calls 'theft' the world
       | calls ;research': Why Sci-Hub is so popular" (2016)
       | <https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/4p2rwk/what_th...>
       | 
       | ________________________________
       | 
       | Notes:
       | 
       | 1. Joseph Stiglitz, "Knowledge as a Global Public Good," in
       | _Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st
       | Century_ , Inge Kaul, Isabelle Grunberg, Marc A. Stern (eds.),
       | United Nations Development Programme, New York: Oxford University
       | Press, 1999, pp. 308-325.
       | <https://archive.org/details/globalpublicgood0000unse/page/30...>
       | 
       | 2. E.g., <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33647625>
       | 
       | 3. "Book store sales in the United States from 1992 to 2021"
       | <https://www.statista.com/statistics/197710/annual-book-store...>
       | 
       | 4. The Archive Org Open Library link above in footnote 1 is
       | presented by way of one of the many information innovations
       | Swartz pioneered: the Open Library itself.
       | 
       | 5. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33643398>
        
         | the-printer wrote:
         | If I'm reading this correctly, a household would pay five
         | dollars and change; and get what in return exactly?
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | Everything ever published.
        
             | MrVandemar wrote:
             | I'd sign up for that in a heartbeat, as long as nobody was
             | tracking the books I was reading.
        
         | amadeuspagel wrote:
         | > As I've noted several times here recently,[2] the $9 billion
         | in annual bookstore sales[3] could be met with a $5.25 per
         | month fee for a typical U.S. household, or an 0.1% income tax
         | basis (say, rolled into your broadband access charge).
         | 
         | > This would provide compensation equal to all current book
         | sales
         | 
         | How would this money be distributed?
        
           | dredmorbius wrote:
           | See for example:
           | 
           | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Fox_Agency>
           | 
           | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_of_Composers,
           | ...>
           | 
           | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical-
           | Copyright_Protectio...>
           | 
           | Mechanical royalties based on exposures and prevalence are
           | already well-established.
           | 
           | I'd suggest a combination of a basic income plus some level
           | of extraordinary royalties, given that writing's reward is
           | _exceedingly_ uneven, both in distribution amongst authors
           | _and_ over time. Present  "tentpole" revenues in publishing
           | (and television, film, and music) reflect this within a
           | market context, where blockbusters support far smaller, often
           | much higher-quality (from a literary, cinemographic, or
           | musical sense) works. A replacement scheme should offer a
           | similar mechanism.
           | 
           | Alternatively, a bidding system in which tranches of works
           | are offered differing levels of compensation, based on
           | various quality-criteria assessments, genres, and classes of
           | works, might be used. Meme-generation and investigative
           | journalism, for example, should arguably not be compensated
           | equivalently.
           | 
           | RMS's "Internet Sharing" proposal (2012) suggests a
           | popularity-based mechanism:
           | 
           |  _I propose instead to pay each artist according to the cube
           | root of his or her popularity. More precisely, the system
           | could ascertain the popularity of each work, divide that
           | among the work 's artists to get a figure for each artist,
           | then compute the cube root of that figure, and set the
           | artist's share in proportion to that cube root._
           | 
           |  _The effect of the cube root stage would be to increase the
           | shares of moderately popular artists by reducing the shares
           | of superstars. Each individual superstar would still get more
           | than an individual non-superstar, even several times as much,
           | but not hundreds or thousands of times as much. Shifting the
           | funds towards moderately popular artists means that a given
           | total sum will adequately support a larger number of artists.
           | Furthermore, the money will do more good for the arts because
           | it will go to the artists who really need it._
           | 
           | <https://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-
           | license.en.ht...>
        
           | freeplay wrote:
           | And herein lies the problem with socialism...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-11-21 23:02 UTC)