SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 60
Property, Intellectual
Property, and Free Riding
Traditional Commons


The word derives from
the unincorporated
land in and around
towns that everyone
was free to use.

Farmers could feed
their sheep, people
could cut wood, or
even live on it.
Traditional Commons




          A pasture allows for a
          certain amount of
          grazing to occur each
          year without the core
          resource being
          harmed.
Rivalry



Some commons are
rivalrous.

This means that an
individual’s use of the
common-pool resource
subtracts from other’s
use.
Rivalry

For example, excessive
grazing may cause the
pasture to erode and
eventually yield less
benefit to its users. I.e.,
there is a limit to the
amount of livestock the
commons can support.
Imagine a field of grass shared by 6 farmers, each with one cow…
A few facts: Each cow currently produces 20 liters of milk per day The carrying
capacity of the commons is 8 cows. For each cow above 8, the milk production
declines by 2 liters (due to overgrazing, there is less grass for each cow: less
grass, less milk!).




                                 20 liters        20 liters



                         20 liters
                                                     20 liters



                                20 liters       20 liters




       Total daily milk production for the commons: 120 liters
Do the farmers sit back and stay at 6 cows? Not if they are individual profit
maximizers (here simplified as milk production maximizers)




                                 20 liters         20 liters



                         20 liters
                                                      20 liters



                                20 liters        20 liters




       Total daily milk production for the commons: 120 liters (6 cows)
Do the farmers sit back and stay at 6 cows? Not if they are individual profit
maximizers (here simplified as milk production maximizers)

       “I’ll get another cow”




                                        40 liters     20 liters



                                20 liters
                                                         20 liters



                                       20 liters    20 liters




       Total daily milk production for the commons: 140 liters (7 cows)
We are now at the carrying capacity -- do they stop? No.



                                                           “Then I’ll get another cow too”




                                40 liters         40 liters



                        20 liters
                                                    20 liters



                               20 liters       20 liters




       Total daily milk production for the commons: 160 liters (8 cows)
They are now at the maximum total milk production. But do they stop? No…




                               36 liters         36 liters
                                                                 “I’ll get another cow”


                       18 liters
                                                   36 liters



                              18 liters       18 liters




      Total daily milk production for the commons: 162 liters (9 cows)
32 liters         32 liters



                 16 liters
                                             32 liters



                        16 liters       32 liters        “My cow is now less productive, but 2
                                                             will improve my situation”




Total daily milk production for the commons: 160 liters (10 cows)
28 liters     28 liters



                         14 liters
                                                  28 liters


“I’ll get another cow”
                                28 liters    28 liters




Total daily milk production for the commons: 154 liters (11 cows)
“Well, everyone else is getting one,
                                          24 liters     24 liters
so me too!”




                                  24 liters
                                                           24 liters



                                         24 liters    24 liters




         Total daily milk production for the commons: 144 liters (12 cows)
“Well, I can still increase milk production
           if I get a third cow”




                                  30 liters     20 liters



                       20 liters
                                                   20 liters



                                20 liters     20 liters




Total daily milk production for the commons: 130 liters (10 cows)
This could go on for a while in a
   vicious downward cycle…
Viewed graphically

                              200

                                                                                 Maximum total production for
                                                                                  commons: 162 liters/day

                              150
                                         Total Milk Production per
                                           Day for all the cows
                                                 combined

                              100
Milk Production (in liters)




                               50




                                0
                                     0           2           4         6   8      10            12         14        16   18   20

                                                       Current level

                               -50
                                       Gain (or Loss) to                                    Yet individual farmers will
                                     Individual Farmer for                                  continue to add cows until
                                        adding one cow                                       there are 15 cows on the
                                                                                                     commons
                              -100
                                                                               Total Cows
Viewed graphically

                              200

                                                                               Maximum total production for
                                                                                commons: 162 liters/day

                              150
                                         Total Milk Production per
                                           Day for all the cows
                                                 combined                                                          loss in
                              100                                                                                  output
Milk Production (in liters)




                               50
                                                                                      GAP

                                0
                                     0           2           4       6   8      10        12        14        16     18   20


                                                                         Socially              Result of individual
                               -50                                       Optimal                    behavior
                                       Gain (or Loss) to
                                     Individual Farmer for
                                        adding one cow

                              -100
                                                                             Total Cows
And solutions?
Capturing Externalities

               If I overgraze a commons,
                that imposes a cost on any
                one else who might want to
                use it.
               Property rights prevent the
                creation of those negative
                externalities by internalizing
                the effects of the use of
                real property.




                                                 20
Property Rights

Logic: If I own the property, I won’t overgraze it.




                                                      21
Real Property

Strong property rights solve the rivalry problem by making real
property exclusive, i.e., all others but the owner can be
prevented from enjoying the benefits of the property.




                                       Keep Out!




                                                                  22
Real Property
 Real property becomes a zero-
 sum environment.
  If I use a piece of land, you
   can’t use it.




                                        23
Squatters and Free Riders

Anyone who uses someone else’s property is
either a squatter or a free rider.

Free riding
undermines the
goals of the property
system. Property
owners won’t invest
if others can free
ride on that
investment.
                                             24
Some commons are
non-excludable --
there is no way to
keep people from
using them, even
though there is a
limited resource, and
overuse will
probably destroy the
resource.
Excludability

       Many commons are
       non-excludable.
Some commons are non-excludable and
also non-rivalrous. We call these “public
goods.” This means that one’s use of the
commons does not subtract from other’s
use.
What About Intellectual
              Property?
Intellectual property in the US has
always been about creating incentives to
invent. Thomas Jefferson said:
“inventions cannot, in nature, be a
subject of property.” For him, the
question was whether the benefit of
encouraging innovation was “worth to
the public the embarrassment of an
exclusive patent.” On this long-standing
view, then, free-competition is the norm.


                                            34
Intellectual Property as Property

Congress, and the courts, increasing treat intellectual property
as a species of real property.




                                 =


                                                                   35
Intellectual Property Protection

Governments set up laws that protect the creator’s right of exclusion:

Patents - How something works or the process of making it

Trade marks – Words or logo to indicate the origin of the products or
services

Designs – The distinctive look of the product or object

Copyright – Artistic or written works eg. Paintings, books, films,
music etc.

One product can be protected with many forms of IP


                                                                         36
Patents


Protect how something works
or how it is made

Must be new

Must not be obvious

Must have a useful application


Should be Better or Cheaper or Different


                                           37
Trade Marks

Distinguish ownership of a product or service


Name, Logo, Slogan, Domain Name, Shape,
Colour, Sound, Smell
Distinctive for the goods or services
which you are applying to register it for
Different from rival
Can not give false impression



                                                38
Registered designs


Distinctive look of object or item

Must be new

Must be unique




                                     39
Examples of registered designs




                                 40
Copyright

Prevents copying of artistic or written works eg. Paintings, books,
films, music etc.

Can be bought, sold or licensed

Lasts up to 70 years after the author’s death

Automatic right

Not registered

Cost is free



                                                                      41
Free Riding on Intellectual Property




                                       42
Metallica vs. Napster

Heavy metal band Metallica
discovered that a demo of their
song ‘I Disappear’ had been
circulating across the Napster
network, even before it was
released. This eventually led to
the song being played on
several radio stations across
America and brought to
Metallica’s attention that their
entire back catalogue of studio
material was also available. The
band responded in 2000 by
filing a lawsuit against the
service offered by Napster.


                                            43
Judge Frank H. Easterbrook

“Patents give a right to exclude, just as the law of trespass does with
real property. Intellectual property is intangible, but the right to
exclude is no different in principle from General Motors’ right to
exclude Ford from using its assembly line…Old rhetoric about
intellectual property equating to monopoly seemed to have vanished
[at the Supreme Court], replaced by a recognition that a right to
exclude in intellectual property is no different in principle from the
right to exclude in physical property…Except in the rarest case, we
should treat intellectual and physical property identically in the law --
which is where the broader currents are taking us.”



                                                                            44
Property Rights

The lessons from the economics
of property rights seems clear:
    Confer strong property rights
     on intellectual property
     creators
    This encourages them to
     invest in identifying,
     developing, and
     commercializing new
     inventions and managing the
     inventions they have already
     made.




                                         45
Misapplication of Property Rights?

 The drive to eliminate free riding is based on a fundamental
 misapplication of the property rights framework.

 The economic theory is premised on the value of property
 rights as tools for internalizing negative externalities, not
 positive one.
  Enclosing the commons made a single owner responsible
   for the consequences of overgrazing.
  Regulation of property internalizes costs of pollution.
  Zoning protects property from misuse.




                                                                 46
Positive Externalities

There is no need to fully
internalize benefits as there is
with harms.

If I put beautiful flowers on by
door step, I don’t capture the full
benefit of those flowers --
passers-by can enjoy them too.

Property law doesn’t give me a
right to track them down and
charge them for the privilege.
                                         47
Positive Externalities

          The fact that my popular store
          is located next to your obscure
          one may drive traffic to your
          store. I don’t have the right to
          charge you for that service.

          That seems to be the premise
          that the modern shopping mall
          is based on.



                                          48
Positive Externalities
The idea that the law should
find a way to compensate for
these positive externalities
seems preposterous to us.
Positive externalities are
everywhere. We couldn’t
internalize them all if we
wanted to. A beekeeper
keeps bees for the honey. An
externality is that trees in the
area are pollinated.

                                          49
Positive Externalities
          Planting trees is a good example of
          the disconnect between positive
          and negative externalities.

          Governments almost never restrict
          the planting trees, an act that
          generally confers only positive
          externalities.

          By contrast, governments often do
          regulate the cutting of trees, even
          on private property, because doing
          so can have long-term negative
          effects on the environment.

                                                50
Positive Externalities

One example where internalization
of positive externalities may be
important is in the case of the use
of a piece of property that requires
substantial fixed investment but is
nonexcludable.

Airports, bridges, roads all fit this
description.

In these cases, a use tax may
internalize some (but not all) of the
positive externalities.

                                              51
Postive Externalities

           It is important to note that unlike
           the case with negative
           externalities, it is not necessary to
           internalize all the positive
           externalities.

           The owners of toll roads don’t
           capture the full social benefits of
           their road to users. They just
           need to capture enough of the
           benefits to make their investment
           worthwhile.

                                                 52
Information is Different

Information can not be depleted, and thus is nonrivalrous.

Information is also non-excludable: “Information wants to be
free.”

My use of an idea doesn’t impose any direct cost on you, and
it is not something that others can be excluded from easily.

This makes it a “public good.”




                                                               53
Information is Different

            Copying information actually
            multiplies the resource, not only in
            making another physical copy, but
            by spreading the idea and
            therefore permitting others to use
            and enjoy it. There are only
            positive externalities!

            Rather than a “tragedy,” an
            information commons is a
            “comedy” in which everyone
            benefits.

                                                 54
Information is Different

We shouldn’t be worried about free
riding in information goods.

It’s not that free riding won’t occur --
it’s ubiquitous.

Everyone can use E=mc2,
Shakespeare, or The Magic Flute
without compensating their
creators. Because use of those
works does no harm to their
creators, it doesn’t create a
negative externality.
                                              55
Information is Different

Information goods create only positive externalities, and there is no
worry about uncompensated positive externalities.

But artists still have to eat.




                                                                        56
Information is Different

           The production of any good involves
           fixed cost investments that must be
           made before production, and
           marginal costs that are incurred
           each time an new unit is produced.

           For information goods, marginal cost
           of reproduction is near zero.

           Some art costs more than other:

           LOTR vs. a poem


                                              57
Information is Different

Intellectual Property rights
are justifiable only to the
extent that creators need to
recover their average fixed
costs. Thus, excludability is
justified if it creates value
for recovery of such costs.

Sometimes it isn’t even
necessary.


                                          58
Information is Different
“What changed, The Times said, was that many more readers started
coming to the site from search engines and links on other sites instead of
coming directly to NYTimes.com. These indirect readers, unable to get
access to articles behind the pay wall and less likely to pay subscription fees
than the more loyal direct users, were seen as opportunities for more page
views and increased advertising revenue.

"What wasn't anticipated was the explosion in how much of our traffic would
be generated by Google, by Yahoo and some others," Ms. Schiller said.

The Times's site has about 13 million unique visitors each month, according
to Nielsen/NetRatings, far more than any other newspaper site. Ms. Schiller
would not say how much increased Web traffic the paper expects by
eliminating the charges, or how much additional ad revenue the move was
expected to generate. “

(Rick Prelinger, via BoingBoing.net)
                                                                                  59
Invention and creation are not zero-
               sum activities
Applying property theory to intellectual property involves the
internalization not of negative externalities, but of positive ones --
benefits conferred on another.




                                               It’s a win-win situation!



Internalizing positive externalities is not a proper goal of real property
rights and shouldn’t be for intellectual property either.


                                                                             60

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais de Rick McKinnon (20)

The trolley problem
The trolley problemThe trolley problem
The trolley problem
 
Challengesto piaget
Challengesto piagetChallengesto piaget
Challengesto piaget
 
Endangered languages
Endangered languagesEndangered languages
Endangered languages
 
Parameter setting
Parameter settingParameter setting
Parameter setting
 
Sugarand slavery
Sugarand slaverySugarand slavery
Sugarand slavery
 
Concepts and categories.ppt
Concepts and categories.pptConcepts and categories.ppt
Concepts and categories.ppt
 
Early language development
Early language developmentEarly language development
Early language development
 
Phonetics
PhoneticsPhonetics
Phonetics
 
Qm for ic
Qm for icQm for ic
Qm for ic
 
Mindreading
MindreadingMindreading
Mindreading
 
Semantics
SemanticsSemantics
Semantics
 
Semantics and pragmatics
Semantics and pragmaticsSemantics and pragmatics
Semantics and pragmatics
 
Hockett
HockettHockett
Hockett
 
E learning buffet
E learning buffetE learning buffet
E learning buffet
 
E learning buffet
E learning buffetE learning buffet
E learning buffet
 
Media e learning design
Media e learning designMedia e learning design
Media e learning design
 
Media e learning design
Media e learning designMedia e learning design
Media e learning design
 
Philosophyoftheinterwebs
PhilosophyoftheinterwebsPhilosophyoftheinterwebs
Philosophyoftheinterwebs
 
Meme
MemeMeme
Meme
 
Why Sleep
Why SleepWhy Sleep
Why Sleep
 

Property, Intellectual Property, And Free Riding

  • 2. Traditional Commons The word derives from the unincorporated land in and around towns that everyone was free to use. Farmers could feed their sheep, people could cut wood, or even live on it.
  • 3. Traditional Commons A pasture allows for a certain amount of grazing to occur each year without the core resource being harmed.
  • 4. Rivalry Some commons are rivalrous. This means that an individual’s use of the common-pool resource subtracts from other’s use.
  • 5. Rivalry For example, excessive grazing may cause the pasture to erode and eventually yield less benefit to its users. I.e., there is a limit to the amount of livestock the commons can support.
  • 6. Imagine a field of grass shared by 6 farmers, each with one cow…
  • 7. A few facts: Each cow currently produces 20 liters of milk per day The carrying capacity of the commons is 8 cows. For each cow above 8, the milk production declines by 2 liters (due to overgrazing, there is less grass for each cow: less grass, less milk!). 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 120 liters
  • 8. Do the farmers sit back and stay at 6 cows? Not if they are individual profit maximizers (here simplified as milk production maximizers) 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 120 liters (6 cows)
  • 9. Do the farmers sit back and stay at 6 cows? Not if they are individual profit maximizers (here simplified as milk production maximizers) “I’ll get another cow” 40 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 140 liters (7 cows)
  • 10. We are now at the carrying capacity -- do they stop? No. “Then I’ll get another cow too” 40 liters 40 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 160 liters (8 cows)
  • 11. They are now at the maximum total milk production. But do they stop? No… 36 liters 36 liters “I’ll get another cow” 18 liters 36 liters 18 liters 18 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 162 liters (9 cows)
  • 12. 32 liters 32 liters 16 liters 32 liters 16 liters 32 liters “My cow is now less productive, but 2 will improve my situation” Total daily milk production for the commons: 160 liters (10 cows)
  • 13. 28 liters 28 liters 14 liters 28 liters “I’ll get another cow” 28 liters 28 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 154 liters (11 cows)
  • 14. “Well, everyone else is getting one, 24 liters 24 liters so me too!” 24 liters 24 liters 24 liters 24 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 144 liters (12 cows)
  • 15. “Well, I can still increase milk production if I get a third cow” 30 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters 20 liters Total daily milk production for the commons: 130 liters (10 cows)
  • 16. This could go on for a while in a vicious downward cycle…
  • 17. Viewed graphically 200 Maximum total production for commons: 162 liters/day 150 Total Milk Production per Day for all the cows combined 100 Milk Production (in liters) 50 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Current level -50 Gain (or Loss) to Yet individual farmers will Individual Farmer for continue to add cows until adding one cow there are 15 cows on the commons -100 Total Cows
  • 18. Viewed graphically 200 Maximum total production for commons: 162 liters/day 150 Total Milk Production per Day for all the cows combined loss in 100 output Milk Production (in liters) 50 GAP 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Socially Result of individual -50 Optimal behavior Gain (or Loss) to Individual Farmer for adding one cow -100 Total Cows
  • 20. Capturing Externalities  If I overgraze a commons, that imposes a cost on any one else who might want to use it.  Property rights prevent the creation of those negative externalities by internalizing the effects of the use of real property. 20
  • 21. Property Rights Logic: If I own the property, I won’t overgraze it. 21
  • 22. Real Property Strong property rights solve the rivalry problem by making real property exclusive, i.e., all others but the owner can be prevented from enjoying the benefits of the property. Keep Out! 22
  • 23. Real Property  Real property becomes a zero- sum environment.  If I use a piece of land, you can’t use it. 23
  • 24. Squatters and Free Riders Anyone who uses someone else’s property is either a squatter or a free rider. Free riding undermines the goals of the property system. Property owners won’t invest if others can free ride on that investment. 24
  • 25. Some commons are non-excludable -- there is no way to keep people from using them, even though there is a limited resource, and overuse will probably destroy the resource.
  • 26. Excludability Many commons are non-excludable.
  • 27.
  • 28.
  • 29.
  • 30. Some commons are non-excludable and also non-rivalrous. We call these “public goods.” This means that one’s use of the commons does not subtract from other’s use.
  • 31.
  • 32.
  • 33.
  • 34. What About Intellectual Property? Intellectual property in the US has always been about creating incentives to invent. Thomas Jefferson said: “inventions cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.” For him, the question was whether the benefit of encouraging innovation was “worth to the public the embarrassment of an exclusive patent.” On this long-standing view, then, free-competition is the norm. 34
  • 35. Intellectual Property as Property Congress, and the courts, increasing treat intellectual property as a species of real property. = 35
  • 36. Intellectual Property Protection Governments set up laws that protect the creator’s right of exclusion: Patents - How something works or the process of making it Trade marks – Words or logo to indicate the origin of the products or services Designs – The distinctive look of the product or object Copyright – Artistic or written works eg. Paintings, books, films, music etc. One product can be protected with many forms of IP 36
  • 37. Patents Protect how something works or how it is made Must be new Must not be obvious Must have a useful application Should be Better or Cheaper or Different 37
  • 38. Trade Marks Distinguish ownership of a product or service Name, Logo, Slogan, Domain Name, Shape, Colour, Sound, Smell Distinctive for the goods or services which you are applying to register it for Different from rival Can not give false impression 38
  • 39. Registered designs Distinctive look of object or item Must be new Must be unique 39
  • 41. Copyright Prevents copying of artistic or written works eg. Paintings, books, films, music etc. Can be bought, sold or licensed Lasts up to 70 years after the author’s death Automatic right Not registered Cost is free 41
  • 42. Free Riding on Intellectual Property 42
  • 43. Metallica vs. Napster Heavy metal band Metallica discovered that a demo of their song ‘I Disappear’ had been circulating across the Napster network, even before it was released. This eventually led to the song being played on several radio stations across America and brought to Metallica’s attention that their entire back catalogue of studio material was also available. The band responded in 2000 by filing a lawsuit against the service offered by Napster. 43
  • 44. Judge Frank H. Easterbrook “Patents give a right to exclude, just as the law of trespass does with real property. Intellectual property is intangible, but the right to exclude is no different in principle from General Motors’ right to exclude Ford from using its assembly line…Old rhetoric about intellectual property equating to monopoly seemed to have vanished [at the Supreme Court], replaced by a recognition that a right to exclude in intellectual property is no different in principle from the right to exclude in physical property…Except in the rarest case, we should treat intellectual and physical property identically in the law -- which is where the broader currents are taking us.” 44
  • 45. Property Rights The lessons from the economics of property rights seems clear:  Confer strong property rights on intellectual property creators  This encourages them to invest in identifying, developing, and commercializing new inventions and managing the inventions they have already made. 45
  • 46. Misapplication of Property Rights?  The drive to eliminate free riding is based on a fundamental misapplication of the property rights framework.  The economic theory is premised on the value of property rights as tools for internalizing negative externalities, not positive one.  Enclosing the commons made a single owner responsible for the consequences of overgrazing.  Regulation of property internalizes costs of pollution.  Zoning protects property from misuse. 46
  • 47. Positive Externalities There is no need to fully internalize benefits as there is with harms. If I put beautiful flowers on by door step, I don’t capture the full benefit of those flowers -- passers-by can enjoy them too. Property law doesn’t give me a right to track them down and charge them for the privilege. 47
  • 48. Positive Externalities The fact that my popular store is located next to your obscure one may drive traffic to your store. I don’t have the right to charge you for that service. That seems to be the premise that the modern shopping mall is based on. 48
  • 49. Positive Externalities The idea that the law should find a way to compensate for these positive externalities seems preposterous to us. Positive externalities are everywhere. We couldn’t internalize them all if we wanted to. A beekeeper keeps bees for the honey. An externality is that trees in the area are pollinated. 49
  • 50. Positive Externalities Planting trees is a good example of the disconnect between positive and negative externalities. Governments almost never restrict the planting trees, an act that generally confers only positive externalities. By contrast, governments often do regulate the cutting of trees, even on private property, because doing so can have long-term negative effects on the environment. 50
  • 51. Positive Externalities One example where internalization of positive externalities may be important is in the case of the use of a piece of property that requires substantial fixed investment but is nonexcludable. Airports, bridges, roads all fit this description. In these cases, a use tax may internalize some (but not all) of the positive externalities. 51
  • 52. Postive Externalities It is important to note that unlike the case with negative externalities, it is not necessary to internalize all the positive externalities. The owners of toll roads don’t capture the full social benefits of their road to users. They just need to capture enough of the benefits to make their investment worthwhile. 52
  • 53. Information is Different Information can not be depleted, and thus is nonrivalrous. Information is also non-excludable: “Information wants to be free.” My use of an idea doesn’t impose any direct cost on you, and it is not something that others can be excluded from easily. This makes it a “public good.” 53
  • 54. Information is Different Copying information actually multiplies the resource, not only in making another physical copy, but by spreading the idea and therefore permitting others to use and enjoy it. There are only positive externalities! Rather than a “tragedy,” an information commons is a “comedy” in which everyone benefits. 54
  • 55. Information is Different We shouldn’t be worried about free riding in information goods. It’s not that free riding won’t occur -- it’s ubiquitous. Everyone can use E=mc2, Shakespeare, or The Magic Flute without compensating their creators. Because use of those works does no harm to their creators, it doesn’t create a negative externality. 55
  • 56. Information is Different Information goods create only positive externalities, and there is no worry about uncompensated positive externalities. But artists still have to eat. 56
  • 57. Information is Different The production of any good involves fixed cost investments that must be made before production, and marginal costs that are incurred each time an new unit is produced. For information goods, marginal cost of reproduction is near zero. Some art costs more than other: LOTR vs. a poem 57
  • 58. Information is Different Intellectual Property rights are justifiable only to the extent that creators need to recover their average fixed costs. Thus, excludability is justified if it creates value for recovery of such costs. Sometimes it isn’t even necessary. 58
  • 59. Information is Different “What changed, The Times said, was that many more readers started coming to the site from search engines and links on other sites instead of coming directly to NYTimes.com. These indirect readers, unable to get access to articles behind the pay wall and less likely to pay subscription fees than the more loyal direct users, were seen as opportunities for more page views and increased advertising revenue. "What wasn't anticipated was the explosion in how much of our traffic would be generated by Google, by Yahoo and some others," Ms. Schiller said. The Times's site has about 13 million unique visitors each month, according to Nielsen/NetRatings, far more than any other newspaper site. Ms. Schiller would not say how much increased Web traffic the paper expects by eliminating the charges, or how much additional ad revenue the move was expected to generate. “ (Rick Prelinger, via BoingBoing.net) 59
  • 60. Invention and creation are not zero- sum activities Applying property theory to intellectual property involves the internalization not of negative externalities, but of positive ones -- benefits conferred on another. It’s a win-win situation! Internalizing positive externalities is not a proper goal of real property rights and shouldn’t be for intellectual property either. 60