The author argues that the current copyright system only benefits best-selling artists while providing no benefits to most creative professionals. The author proposes abandoning copyright and ensuring no further market domination by a limited number of "conglomerates" that control production, distribution, and promotion in cultural fields like film, music, books, design, and visual arts. By scrapping copyright and preventing market control, many more cultural entrepreneurs would be able to take risks, serve more audience needs, and create new works, promoting greater cultural diversity than the current system allows. However, some argue this could reduce incentives for investment if works were easily replicable without copyright protection.

1. No More Bestsellers
By Joost Smiers
“The present copyright system is
beneficial for a few best-selling artists
while providing no benefits at all for most
creative professionals.”

2. Privatization of common knowledge
• Knowledge cultivated over centuries
• Farmers in India VS Monsanto
This worries the author because…

3. Essentially, any public knowledge

4. Can be slightly modified

5. Privatized, denying access to the rest

6. …Well, except for pay

7. Should the latest modifier be given absolute
rights of ownership, especially if this knowledge
is necessary for further development?
- Currently, only the best sellers are benefitting

8. If we abandon Copyright:
• More artists will earn more easily
• Resources of production, distribution and
promotion should have many owners
• Free database of knowledge
• Audience should make their own choice from
“a wide variety of cultural expressions”

9. How to abandon Copyright?
• Cultural Entrepreneur
• Takes risks in a chosen field
• Field bears similarities to any other
business
• Be capable of staying one step ahead
of the competition

10. 2 Controlling Markets
Copyright law Monopolization
• Total control by • Limited number of
best sellers “conglomerates”
• Good investment • Yet, a strong grip:
– Production, Distribution, Promotion
protection
– Films
• Disrupts cultural – Music
diversity – Books
– Design
– Visual Arts

11. Is it possible to achieve an environment in which
no single party is able to control or influence the
market?
Will cultural entrepreneurs be able to
successfully participate without being pushed
aside?

12. GIANTS – copyright holders
• Determine whether, how,
where a work should be
used
• What should be
acceptable
• Atmosphere

13. Proposal for a New Market
1. Scrap Copyright
2. Ensure no further
market domination
Simultaneously!

14. Abolishing copyright…
• No more investments for only the privileged
 No more epic films!
- Maybe a loss, maybe not (無責任)
• Historically genres have been replaced
- People will get used to change
• Values cultural diversity more

15. Normalizing market conditions
“What we see, hear and read contributes
extensively to the forming of our identities, in
the plural. It cannot be stressed enough that
there should therefore be many, many
enterprises in the cultural field; instead of being
pushed away from public attention by
excessively strong forces, they should be able to
offer their cultural wares from totally different
perspectives.”

16. Consequences
• No more monopolists  medium-sized, small
• Investigation against excessive domination
• Equal distribution of assets
• Many cultural entrepreneurs can take more
risks, serve more needs
• Create new needs
• ‘Well-sellers’

17. Free-riders?
• Artists and entrepreneurs add their value
• No one can steal, control and promote as easily
• Sure, another company
- or ten, twenty, forty will try to reproduce same
work
But who will want to invest in something so easily
replicable?

18. Other benefits
• Reduce income gap between artists
• Activities become profitable  worth investment
• Stability
• 2008: Serving the common good
• Markets don’t self-regulate, need to be organized
to serve a broader spectrum of interests