Copy free music files, comparable to mortgage assets

If the owner's promise to repay a loan can be replicated as many times as music does, it degrades the original value of the house, and the value of the long-term wealth that the homeowner can hold is reduced. Free copy music, long

Copying free music files can be compared to mortgage-backed assets: If a homeowner's promise to repay a loan can be duplicated as many times as music does, it degrades the original value of the house and reduces the value of the long-term wealth the homeowner can hold. Free reproduction of music has long been a cause of harm to those who support the source of replication.

Titanium Media Note: Titanium Media has published an article Jaron Jaron Lanier about the controversy about whether the information is free ≠ the future of information free, the article in his view that information in the future will not continue to be free, but to follow the law into the charging mode. In this article, Lanier continues to discuss how to charge and charge for information on the music industry. Titanium media to compile the content of the article as follows, the expectation of digital music practitioners, internet entrepreneurs to bring new thinking.

If copying copies becomes a breeze, music will not be a scarce resource. In this way, the market value of music will naturally take a nosedive. It is a vexed question that sharing music files is not a "stealing" act. I don't want to talk about this controversial topic because I don't think the software should be seen in the sense of moral right or wrong. It is neutral, boring, even more indifferent to right or wrong.

Out of this argument, in a more long-term perspective, although we should not arbitrarily fake music documents, it is too early to condemn some pirated people. Although they are involved in a lucrative music industry network, they do not share the profits they deserve. In this case, it is unfair to ask them to stop sharing and steal music files. In the network age, the general public individual's data information is monitored all the time, and never because others use their own relevant information to get paid.

I would like to see that in the end everyone will be able to accept paid music, but I will not ask for payment until the value of the payment is available.

It is particularly important that we make a long-term contribution to the industry. If you don't know the music industry, it's an industry that brings a lot of good jobs, and it doesn't matter in your eyes. And I will show you that we should see this loss as an early warning to others.

From an economic point of view, copying a musician's work is tantamount to trampling on the dignity of artistic achievement. Doing so does not necessarily sever all forms of income for the musician, but it does make the musician have the economic value of creating real time, which means that perhaps the artist will be rewarded for playing the music now, but those recorded in the past will be free.

It doesn't matter to sing a song occasionally at dinner, but if every meal must be sung, the singer will be forced into the farmer's dilemma. The so-called Farmer's Dilemma refers to the farmer's year-round spring harvest busy, hoping to be able to rest, and really rested no farm work can be dry and have to worry about the livelihood.

A musician may not be able to play music at the normal level or earn income if he or she is seriously ill, or advanced in age. Of course, there are a handful of musicians who are sick or old and can perform brilliantly. But even the best professionals may be mashiqianti by bad luck if they live on live interpretation alone. Real life can not avoid unexpected events. So, in the end, every person who makes a living by creating an immediate economic value will have a hard time.

At the same time, third-party surveillance devices, such as social networks or search engines, continue to generate wealth with replication information and records. If a musician is divorced from the usual shelter of special instruments and royalties, engaging in real time career, winning popularity will still not hinder, even through the T-shirts, wigs and other star-related real goods to obtain a certain income, but can no longer have a lasting wealth. The wealth was converged by the central server. You see, music is similar to mortgage-backed assets.

This analogy can be likened to the possibility that a third party without a public identity would be able to gain real wealth by using the Internet to borrow the mortgaged assets and then packaging the loans into complex portfolios, and without disclosing the constituent parts of the securities.

The owner's promise to repay the loan is as many copies as a singer's music file. So many copies of the promise of a certain homeowner to create wealth diminish the value of the owner's original reproduction. As a result of such duplication, the wealth that homeowners can gain over time is correspondingly reduced.

The assumption is that, in another case, the homeowner's promise to repay the mortgage is only once, and the risk that the loan will not be repaid may increase by several times. In a way, homeowners eventually have to pay for this inflated risk and end up paying a higher tax field. Because the government needs a lot of money to bail out financial institutions that are "too big to fail". The folly of mortgages in the vicinity has devalued local property and reduced the loans available to buy homes.

Once all the people who have received the promise of repayment carry greater risk, the loan becomes scarce. Without an absolute top credit rating, people will not get enough loans. Even the wealthiest countries may struggle to have top-rated assets. Once those "certainty" illusions are disillusioned, the real world becomes notorious and lenders are no longer willing to lend to them.

It is all too obvious to witness the tragedy of the subprime bust. Mortgage loans are like music files. Securitised mortgages are like documents for pirated music.

In either case, there is no immediate harm to those who occasionally try to benefit. After all, what happened was just someone else's computer with some binary digits, nothing more than creating an abstract copy, a quiet little change far away. However, in the same way, the people who support this source of replication in real life will be the victims.