The Story

Motivation

Due to the development of the internet, it has become possible to share art and knowledge
at a rate that exceeds the limits of the mind. Beyond art and knowledge, software and other conceptual tools are transmitted through these networks. All of these examples have tremendous value to social welfare and culture. By convention, these conceptual items fall into a category known as intellectual property.

The system of acquisition and compensation for intellectual property varies somewhat by profession and governance. For artists and inventors, however, relying on compensation through government-enforced exclusivity is a common tactic.

Governments have a few ways of managing the trade and stimulating interest in intellectual property -- the most prominent of which are copyrights and patents. As the communication infrastructures have developed, the markets for intellectual property have expanded dramatically. Along with the expanding markets, innovation and production of intellectual property have accelerated. Copyrights and patents put litigation and coercion in the middle of a market that used to be the domain of businesses, but now includes the layman. It used to be impossible for the layman to replicate a piece of art at a reasonable cost, or to implement a system that infringes on patents by accident.

Because of advancements in automation and other technologies, the cost of duplicating intellectual property in an electronic format is imperceptibly small. Even the cost of the media is small, with flash devices of adequate capacity costing roughly as much as a restaurant outing. This capability had not been accounted for during the drafting of intellectual property laws.

So, while markets have increased, costs of reproduction have decreased. This should mean that the products have become cheaper, in order for supply and demand to meet. There are economic concepts that play on human psychology that have prevented the decrease in price. "Artificial Scarcity" is one such concept. By releasing instances of the intellectual property for limited times and infrequently, the prices can be kept high. The end-users who would rather wait for a price drop are panicked into paying more immediately, to avoid being unable to find it later. This tactic can pay off for creators and retailers, but it does so at the great displeasure of the end-user. There are psychological hurdles to overcome to make a system that makes both parties happy.

Today, frustrated end-users can easily acquire duplicates of intellectual property without compensating the creators. The participants in the duplication and transmission are using no specialized tools, and need no special knowledge to accomplish the task. This caused panic among the intellectual property holders.

There has been much litigation attempting to punish end-users who engage in the transmission of copyrighted materials. Litigation is not looked upon kindly by even the law-abiding end-users. Some intellectual property holders have even tried to make a business model out of suing end-users who infringe on their copyrights and patents. The amount of monitoring that is necessary to make punishment a means of compensation to intellectual property creators is ludicrous. It is an inefficient market, and leaves nearly everyone unsatisfied. It can also leave end-users paying for damages that they hadn't actually caused, or paying for intellectual property that they simply do not want.

If legal copies of intellectual property could be acquired cheaply (in terms of both money and convenience), the incentive to engage in infringing behavior evaporates. How cheap would it have to be to compete with free? Considering that the free copies are illegal and that most consumers of intellectual property have some degree of respect for the creators, it would only need to be cheap
enough that the end-user doesn't feel compelled to comparison-shop.

Creating and managing these extremely high-volume, low-cost markets is what this project aims to accomplish.