TY  - GEN
AB  - The usual assumption that copyright rewards creativity is a fiction. In practice, most authors earn very little compared to their publishers. This article asks what services, if any, publishers supply to justify these payments.  We  argue  that  the  only  reasonable  candidate  is  search,  i.e. finding  worthwhile  titles  among  the  million  or  so  books  written  each year. For   most   of   the   20thCentury,   there   was   just   one   search technology: Human  judgment.  This  led  to  a  complex  ecosystem  of editors,   bookstore   owners,   reviewers   and   other   middlemen.   The difference   in   the   21stCentury   is   the   emergence   of   a   second technology—“Big  Data”—that    could    make    traditional    methods obsolete.  But  in  that  case  what  new  institutions  will  implement  it? Depending on how Big Data evolves, we can anticipate three futures. In the  first,  the  technology  never  advances  much  beyond  its  existing capabilities so that current institutions continue in something like their present  form.  We  argue  that this is  already  an  improvement  over  mid-20thcentury publishing. At the same time, the advent of e-readers allows new  forms  of  price  discrimination  that  could  significantly  improve economic  efficiency.  Judges  should reform the Second Circuit’s Apple decision to make this happen. More  powerful  “Big  Data”  technologies  will  force  deeper changes.   These   will   almost   certainly   start   with   massive   vertical integration.  Our  second  future  analyzes  the  case  where  today’s dominant  on-line  retailers  continue  expanding  up  and  downstream. Despite   obvious   concerns,   we   argue   that   clearing   away   costly middlemen will almost certainly improve social welfare on net. We also consider  an  alternate  future  in  which  today’s  dominant  publishers preempt  retailers  by  creating  an  open  search  platform.  Taking  search outside traditional proprietary models can radically improve consumer welfare,  but  only  if  legislators  are  prepared  to  make  correspondingly large adjustments to copyright law. Finally, we ask which of our three futures is most likely. We argue that  Big  Data  algorithms  are  inherently  voracious,  so  that  the  future belongs  to  whichever  institutions  collect  the  biggest  and  most  useful datasets.  We  identify  the  conditions  under  which  proprietary  solutions can  outperform  open  source  and  vice  versa.  The  article  concludes  by asking  what  judges  and  policymakers  should  do  to  create  a  level playing  field  so  that  the  most  efficient  institutions  really  do  emerge  if and when technology makes them possible.
AU  - Maurer, Stephen M.
ID  - 41941
KW  - Technology
KW  - Big Data
KW  - Data
KW  - Publishing
KW  - Proprietary models
KW  - Open search
KW  - Open source
LA  - eng
LK  - http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/MAURER-ARTICLE.pdf
N2  - The usual assumption that copyright rewards creativity is a fiction. In practice, most authors earn very little compared to their publishers. This article asks what services, if any, publishers supply to justify these payments.  We  argue  that  the  only  reasonable  candidate  is  search,  i.e. finding  worthwhile  titles  among  the  million  or  so  books  written  each year. For   most   of   the   20thCentury,   there   was   just   one   search technology: Human  judgment.  This  led  to  a  complex  ecosystem  of editors,   bookstore   owners,   reviewers   and   other   middlemen.   The difference   in   the   21stCentury   is   the   emergence   of   a   second technology—“Big  Data”—that    could    make    traditional    methods obsolete.  But  in  that  case  what  new  institutions  will  implement  it? Depending on how Big Data evolves, we can anticipate three futures. In the  first,  the  technology  never  advances  much  beyond  its  existing capabilities so that current institutions continue in something like their present  form.  We  argue  that this is  already  an  improvement  over  mid-20thcentury publishing. At the same time, the advent of e-readers allows new  forms  of  price  discrimination  that  could  significantly  improve economic  efficiency.  Judges  should reform the Second Circuit’s Apple decision to make this happen. More  powerful  “Big  Data”  technologies  will  force  deeper changes.   These   will   almost   certainly   start   with   massive   vertical integration.  Our  second  future  analyzes  the  case  where  today’s dominant  on-line  retailers  continue  expanding  up  and  downstream. Despite   obvious   concerns,   we   argue   that   clearing   away   costly middlemen will almost certainly improve social welfare on net. We also consider  an  alternate  future  in  which  today’s  dominant  publishers preempt  retailers  by  creating  an  open  search  platform.  Taking  search outside traditional proprietary models can radically improve consumer welfare,  but  only  if  legislators  are  prepared  to  make  correspondingly large adjustments to copyright law. Finally, we ask which of our three futures is most likely. We argue that  Big  Data  algorithms  are  inherently  voracious,  so  that  the  future belongs  to  whichever  institutions  collect  the  biggest  and  most  useful datasets.  We  identify  the  conditions  under  which  proprietary  solutions can  outperform  open  source  and  vice  versa.  The  article  concludes  by asking  what  judges  and  policymakers  should  do  to  create  a  level playing  field  so  that  the  most  efficient  institutions  really  do  emerge  if and when technology makes them possible.
SN  - 0736-7694
T1  - Digital publishingThree futures (and to get there)
TI  - Digital publishingThree futures (and to get there)
UR  - http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/MAURER-ARTICLE.pdf
ER  -