Xref: utzoo talk.politics.theory:1081 comp.society.futures:563 comp.misc:2592 talk.politics.misc:10559 comp.std.misc:22 soc.misc:731
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!kurt
From: kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,comp.society.futures,comp.misc,talk.politics.misc,comp.std.misc,soc.misc
Subject: Re: Rewarding Researchers Without Restricting Copying
Keywords: copyright patent economics ISA
Message-ID: <4070@fluke.COM>
Date: 13 Jun 88 14:41:09 GMT
References: <10777@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: news@tc.fluke.COM
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 20


ACK (NAK, actually).

This person must be an engineer.  Only an engineer would put so much trust
in a machine.  The big problem with a quasi-governmental organ to administer
software royalties is that NOBODY would subscribe.

It would be in the best interests of manufacturers with already-established,
somewhat workable distribution networks to prevent new companies from getting
into the ISA because this would deny them a major revenue source.  In fact,
these manufacturers would work to keep the ISA from forming for the same reason.

The government will not enjoy a beaurocracy as powerful as ISA, nor one that
wields so much economic muscle, or has the power, essentially, to tax the
government.  They will certainly not volunteer to pay higher prices for
software.  In fact, the ISA is not in any user's best interest because it
causes the total cost of software to rise.

Not to mention the already discussed problems inherent in a beaurocracy.
of the required size...