Reading Material

Some scattered stuff today.

First, Edward Leamer writes a fascinating essay on recent and future economic history and the role geography plays in economic development. The essay is disguised as a review of Tom Friedman's book 'The World is Flat', and gets in lots of amusing shots at Friedman while covering a ton of ground (so to speak).

He descends into economese at a few points, but for the most part it is quite readable and very interesting, with lots of good analogies, such as the following:

"I like to raise some doubts by posing the rhetorical question; "Is a computer more like a forklift or more like a microphone?" It doesn't matter much who drives the forklift, but it matters a lot who sings into the microphone. Think about the forklift first. You might be a lot stronger than I, but with a little bit of training, I can operate a forklift and lift just as much as you or any other forklift operator. Thus the forklift is a force for income equality, eliminating your
strength advantage over me. That is decidedly not the case for a microphone. We cannot all operate a microphone with anywhere near the same level of proficiency.
Indeed, I venture the guess that I would have to pay you to listen to me sing, not the other way round. And I seriously doubt that a lifetime of training would allow me to compete with Springsteen, or Pavarotti."

In the end Leamer concludes that, "Physically, culturally, and economically the world is not flat. Never has been, never will be. There may be vast flat plains inhabited by indistinguishable hoi polloi doing mundane tasks, but there will also be hills and mountains from which the favored will look down on the masses. Our most important gifts to our offspring are firm footholds on those hills and mountains, far from the flat part of the competitive landscape."

In essence the idea is that, to succeed, our economy will need to cultivate enough Springsteen's and Pavarotti's in enough different fields that their massive earnings bring up the average and enough wealth trickles down for everyone else to make a decent living as well. Reading it certainly gives some urgency to ensuring that Canada has things like widespread and affordable broadband and wireless internet infrastructure as well as a high quality child care and education system. Even if you disagree with the conclusions, this 'review' is the kind of piece where the journey matters as much or more than the destination.


Hat-tip to Marginal Revolution for the link.
-----

Second, a while back I googled across this paper on the ethics of copyright by Mark Alfino. The first section of the paper provide some really interesting background on the legal history of copyright and the section section has an interesting discussion of some philosophical approaches to the question.

From the first section,

"Copyright began as a royal prerogative granted to the main publishing guild, the Stationers Company. The granting of a license to control copy was originally motivated by the crown's desire to control the spread of potentially threatening religious or political ideas.(3)

Until the first modern copyright statute, the 1709 Statute of Anne, the Stationers Company enjoyed an unlimited monopoly over copy, including at times, the right to search buildings and seize copy.(4)

Modern copyright laws, which recognize, as a matter of moral principle, a limit to the monopoly which control of copy entails, begin with the Statute of Anne in 1709, subtitled, "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or Purchasers of such Copies, during the Times herein mentioned." The act first gave legal expression to the idea that the social value of disseminating information and culture was great enough to justify limiting the property interests of publishers. The act also prepared the way for an author's copyright.

The Stationers argued for and received extensions to the statutory limits of copyright in the act. They continued to charge exorbitant prices for classics of English literature and editions of the Bible, to which they owned the copyright. The "Battle of the Books" took place during the first three quarters of the 18th century(5) as independent publishers, in sympathy with the "Society for the Encouragement of Learning," challenged copyright holders by producing unauthorized editions of popular English literature. In the celebrated case of Donaldson v. Beckett (1774), a lasting precedent against perpetual copyright was established."

The key point in the Donaldson case was that the court ruled that copyright was a creation of the law rather than an absolute right (like the right to possess physical property).

As Alfino notes,

"If copyright is a form of limited monopoly granted through statute, based on policy considerations, and not an absolute common law right, the ethical burden of proof shifts to copyright holders to show that their property interests are more important than the public good of having access to information."

Something to remember next time you run across industry propaganda which equates intellectual property, with physical property. And also something to keep in mind when the Conservative government introduces its new copyright legislation.