I understand the whole argument about property not being abstract, therefore invalidating the notion of “intellectual property.” But on a strictly utilitarian viewpoint, What do you make of movie producers that spend millions to make good quality products (i.e. movies)? How would they make profits without being able to sell DVDs?
Wouldn’t this lower the quality of movies on the long-run?
“How would they make profits without being able to sell DVDs?”
NOBODY STOPS THEM FROM SELLING DVDs 
Come on. Once one DVD is sold and put on the Internet, who would actually buy to watch the movie when they can just look it up on the Internet?
lol, are you blind? Many people buy dvds even if it is possible to download them for free from torrents and other sources. But it is not an argument for IP, but an argument for universal ethics (if you like something someone created and uploaded for free, support that person and donate some money to him/her). Even though I believe dvds will eventually die out, but now streaming takes their place. And there are again, many people who pay for streaming rather than downloading same movie for free. Furthermore, if you can not make profit (you can not find a way to earn money) from your creations, then you are a poor business man many and should be outcompeted by those, who DO manage to sell “free stuff”. It’s simple competition.
For example, I create music and let my fans to download all my albums for free, yet, there are people who still pay few dollars (5 to 10 usually) for an album of 9-10 tracks (I am going under “name your price” scheme, which lets people to enter “0” value if they want to download it for free). And I am not the only one doing this and I probably could earn more money if I was “agressive” in my advertising ways etc. So it’s not a problem for many individuals, but it is a big issue for corporations, who enjoyed this monopoly for decades. It’s time to bring the profits back to real artists.
Can anyone point me to a large paper or a book against intellectual property that isn’t Kinsella’s: “Against Intellectual Property”? I didn’t like that so much because it talked about the absurdities of IP, rather than the positive/negative effects of IP.
Perhaps begin by repealing the SCOTUS decision that prevents movie companies from owning theaters (something of the sort). It appears that it increased prices for consumers and made life hearder for producers.
What do you mean by “good quality”? Don’t you agree that quality is subjective?
Anyway, as far as costs, perhaps costs would be lower if producers were free to hire whomever they wanted, instead of being constrained by state-enforced guilds.
Aside from actors’ salaries, I really don’t know why it costs hundreds of millions of dollars to produce a movie. Maybe it’s because producers use technology that is patented by Dolby, Idustrial Light and Magic, etc.
There is Blu-ray, streaming, theatres, books, graphic novels, action figures and other merchandise.
Or, if it is not profitable to spent hundred of millions of dollars on a movie, then perhaps the market is sending a signal to the movie producers; specifically, “dont make that movie!” That is, the market is telling capitalists that their capital should be used elsewhere.
Leaving aside that quality is subjective, so what if it does?
Maybe more people would attend movie theaters if the theatres offered food service. No, not standing in line to pay $5 for a hotdog, but having waiters in the actual theater. Maybe if theaters kicked out people who were being rude and obnoxious. Maybe if the seats weren’t of a material that serves as an incubator for bacteria. Maybe if the movie in the room next door wasn’t hearable to audiences not in that theater.
Neodoxy, Against Intellectual Monopoly.
Maybe more people would attend movie theaters if the theatres offered food service. No, not standing in line to pay $5 for a hotdog, but having waiters in the actual theater. Maybe if theaters kicked out people who were being rude and obnoxious. Maybe if the seats weren’t of a material that serves as an incubator for bacteria. Maybe if the movie in the room next door wasn’t hearable to audiences not in that theater.
There are theaters around here that do offer food services, real food. but they are not as big as competing theaters like Regal, AMC, and Cinemark, and don’t get movies opening weeked.
Also, I still buy dvd’s.
The way I see it is that profits could still be made, they just wouldn’t be guaranteed. In other words, IP socializes losses and privatizes profits.
The National Socialists loved IP.
MaikU I like a nice dvd collection just how I like a nice book collection.
Considering the many quality movies that came from the era before the DVD and home video income stream existed for movie producers, I don’t see any reason for it to be a concern now.
I know. It’s usually the “independant” theaters showing indie flicks.
Okay. How about this: There could be movie theaters for pot smokers to smoke pot while watching a movie. I’m sure there would be a niche that would patronize those.
Actually, there’s two around here and from what I know they don’t do just indie movies. One is Cinema Cafe that has at least 2 locations. You have tables infront of you or you can have your own booths, etc. They generally get movies 3 weeks after they’ve been out, but it’s mainly bigger name movies instead of indie movies. Another is CineBistro, I never been but I heard it puts any other movie experience to shame.
I saw a blog post on pretty much this topic a couple of days ago:
An interesting anecdote in the comments section, showing just how far movie producers can be willing to go on no more than a hunch.
This.
Also this. Combined with movie studios being allowed to own movie theaters, it sounds like there’d be plenty of financial incentive remaining (if not more!) to produce big-budget movies.
I also think that CDs, DVDs, and other recorded media would still be sold, but at a lower price. Some people (like myself) prefer DVDs because they’re higher-quality. Furthermore, you might actually see more of such media sold, because people would be free to sell copies out in the open.