X:
[I’m a law student in a foreign country]
I’ve found many interesting subjects regarding Intellectual Property, especially this debate inside the libertarian community, with Austrian economists’ and anarcho-capitalists postures being the ones I’m the most curious about. This is where I found your articles and your contact information.
Before, while doing some personal investigation about ways to achieve more liquidity from copyrights and their use as assets I found out that decentralization through the use of blockchain and DLTs in creative works markets and the participation of artists and authors in such tends to provide more efficiency and effectiveness for this purpose, of artists and authors getting paid for their works, I’m also a musician so that’s why I was trying to learn about this subject.
The question lies about if centralized legislation is really necessary for reaching that purpose, when decentralized markets can provide more effective ways to achieve it; can these decentralized markets be relevant in this debate’s context?
Kinsella:
I’m not sure if I follow your question. If you have read my work surely you realize I oppose copyright law, and all legislation as a means of making law, and I don’t think the purpose of law is to legislate so as to ensure artists have enough “liquidity” or something. In any case I am not sure I understand your question exactly. Perhaps you could concisely re-state your question as a single (non-compound) question and one that is not loaded, and I will try to see if I can give you a coherent answer.
X:
Is it a better alternative (financially) for artists to participate in decentralized art markets based on blockchain than to rely on traditional copyright systems?
Kinsella:
I don’t accept the loaded premises. I think the purpose of blockchain is only to serve as the backbone of a system for digital money, i.e. bitcoin. Not for record keeping. And I don’t see that keeping records has anything to do with copyright type claims. As my book makes clear you cannot get anything like copyright from a contractual system. And I see no purpose in using the blockchain for records or contracts anyway.
What artists should do is make art if they want to, and if they want to make money, figure out how to do so. They have to do this even today in a world with copyright, piracy is easy. Without copyright they would still have to find a way to support their business or hobbies. Any contractual scheme is not copyright or IP as I explain explicitly in my writing. see AIP, the section “Contract vs. Reserved Rights”. And why would you need blockchain to keep records or contracts? Contracts work fine as is. I think this focus on blockchain, smart contracts, is totally confused and wrong. see e.g. https://www.stephankinsella.com/2022/02/libertarian-answer-man-smart-contracts/
As for things artists can do … many things. but it’s up to them.
see Do Business Without Intellectual Property
“Examples of Ways Content Creators Can Profit Without Intellectual Property.”
ultimately:
You must log in to post a comment. Log in now.