Why the RIAA/MPAA doesn't get it.

[Redwolf]

Yes, I am really browsing the net tonight. Here's a delightful little story I found. It's a cautionary tale, and unlike my last post, is easy to understand. Especially if you know who the RIAA or MPAA is (by now, that should be 99.99% of you).

http://www.ptz.com/c/a00009.html

for lazy clickers
There was once a a land whose inhabitants knew no form of artificial light. They were unable to do anything at night and though they were a rich and prosperous nation in other ways they had to rely on the stars and the moon once the sum set.

There were many ingenious inventors in this country and one day the the government of this country declared that if any of them could invent a way of producing light to illuminate his peoples way in the night, that person would be rewarded with a monopoly on his invention.

One day a clever inventor made the first candle this country had seen. He was duly rewarded and only he or someone with his permission was permitted to manufacture any means of manufacturing candles.

The people of this country were very pleased to have candles and their houses and cities were soon a blaze of light. The inventor became very rich, and his factories that made candles became the greatest industry in the country, for nights were long in the winter and no one could work (or do much else) without a candle.

Because the offer of a monopoly had lead to such a great and useful invention, the government decided that such monopolies were a good idea and they passed a law that any inventor would have a monopoly on his invention, whether it was a machine, a method of doing things. After all they said, now many other inventors will work hard to come up with such good ideas. ``After all'' they thought, ``if this one man came up with this invention when we promised him a monopoly, how may other inventions will the rest of the country think of if we offer them too monopolies. we will have other new industries, and great wealth will come to our country''.

As soon as the inventor of the candle heard this he went to patent office which the government had established to register new inventions, and he spent a long time there.

A few years later another inventor found that with a glass bulb and some filament and a supply of electricity she could produce better light than any candle. She wanted to make and sell her invention, thinking that she could be richer than the inventor of the candle.

Very soon she got a letter from the lawyer inventor of the candle, not only did he have a monopoly on candles, but when the new laws had come in he made a visit to the patent office. He he had registered a patent on ``producing artificial illumination''. The light bulb was clearly an artificial method of producing illumination and breached his patent.

The inventor of the candle went to the member of parliament who represented her and said ``This is an unjust law, I have made as great an invention as the inventor of the candle and yet I can not profit, and neither can any one else benefit from using my invention''. The politician, being astute and skilled in his trade said ``There is a great candle factory in my constituency, what will the workers who make candles say if it closes? Will they vote for me again? Your electric bulbs last longer than candles and therefore fewer people will be employed to make them, do you expect me to want to destroy and industry that employs so many just for a better light when candles are good enough?''. Soon this invention was forgotten .

After many years the patent on the candle lapsed, as did the patent on producing artificial light, and many people thought ``now, I too can make money by making candles''. They did so but they too soon for letters from the lawyer of the inventor of candles. He had a trademark on the word candle and they could not use it. They said ``So how can we sell our products if we can not tell people what they are'' and he replied ``I have a right to make sure that consumers do not confuse my product with yours, after all have I not spent money on developing the branding of candles?''.

Nonetheless people did not care what brands their lights were, and the other manufacturers sold theirs as ``wax-lights'' or by similar names.

The inventor of the candle had put thought them with even greater cleverness than he had shown in his original invention. Bankers found that he had a patent for ``a method of processing financial transactions under artificial illumination'', physicians found he had a patent for ``a method of performing surgical procedures under artificial illumination'', everyone found he had a patent on ``a method of illuminating a dwelling with artificial light''. If they wished to do these things they had to either buy their candles from him or pay a high fee to him. Soon the other manufacturers went out of business, as did those who attempted to manufacture electric lights.

The inventor of the candle grew richer and richer. So did the makers of wax who supplied him. The industries based on the candle are the foundation of their economy. All politicians agree this is a good thing: for if they are left wing they agree with the Union of Candle Workers (the greatest trade union) that jobs must be protected, and if they are right wing they wish to protect the greatest example of successful enterprise in their country. Surely we can not be wrong in wishing to follow the example this lucky and prosperous country?

[CubKid]

Not exactly sure what that story means, but what is up with the page that its on? I clicked the link, and all I saw was blue until I highlighted it. Once I did it showed up with its background until I scrolled, then it was blue again.