000041941 000__ 03486cam\a22002535i\4500 000041941 001__ 41941 000041941 003__ SzGeWIPO 000041941 005__ 20240708145852.0 000041941 008__ 200619s2018\\\\sz\\\\\\r\\\\\000\0\eng\d 000041941 022__ $$a0736-7694 000041941 040__ $$aSzGeWIPO$$beng$$erda 000041941 041__ $$aeng 000041941 1001_ $$aMaurer, Stephen M. 000041941 24503 $$aDigital publishing$$bThree futures (and to get there) 000041941 264_1 $$a[New York City, New York] :$$bYeshiva University Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law,$$c2018. 000041941 300__ $$a59 pages 000041941 336__ $$atext$$btxt$$2rdacontent 000041941 337__ $$aunmediated$$bn$$2rdamedia 000041941 338__ $$avolume$$bnc$$2rdacarrier 000041941 520__ $$aThe 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. 000041941 525__ $$aPublished in : Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law, vol. 36, no. 3 000041941 650_0 $$aTechnology 000041941 650_0 $$aBig Data 000041941 650_0 $$aData 000041941 650_0 $$aPublishing 000041941 650_0 $$aProprietary models 000041941 650_0 $$aOpen search 000041941 650_0 $$aOpen source 000041941 85641 $$uhttp://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/MAURER-ARTICLE.pdf$$yView this resource 000041941 904__ $$aJournal article 000041941 980__ $$aBIB