a) The government cannot publicly own all porn. Non-government-sanctioned porn would immediately spring up that would be even worse than what there is now.
b) The idea of the government being put in a position of deciding what art is, or having any ability to regulate it, is horrifying.
The government would not own porn. Nor would the government decide what "art" is. The government would simply manage compensation for artists, who would retain ownership over their own work.
The government would simply be a money-transfer organization - collecting a generalized bandwidth tax, and distributing that to content producers on the basis of how many times their work was downloaded.
No "ownership" would be involved. The Artists collectively would be completely in charge of the corporation. The government would just pay them.
That means that if I took a picture of a woman being raped and strangled at the same time (not a REAL snuff picture, mind you, just an imitation) and people downloaded it, the government would pay me to do that. And, of course, the government represents the tax dollars of non-snuff-porn-watching people. I have some issues with this plan.
Isn't that better than the woman in the video *not* getting paid?
Besides - the government wouldn't be paying you to do that, they would be acting as brokers. By downloading your video and paying bandwidth taxes for the right to do so, the consumers would be paying you, albeit somewhat indirectly - i.e. contributing to a general fund with their tax dollars, from which you receive remuneration commensurate with the average number of downloads your material elicits.
art / porn postratatoskFebruary 4 2008, 05:16:13 UTC
[ran across your journal searching in the directory for somebody else, but this caught my eye and I had a comment]
One problem here is that most people making porn (well, to be fair, this probably also applies to a few regular artists) are anonymous amateurs who would chose to stay unpaid unless they could remain anonymous. The government, which would like to know everything about everyone, is about the last entity anyone would trust to run something like that. You would need a lot of internal safeguards.
The problem with tracking downloading is the privacy aspect on the consumer end -- the government is also dead last in the list of entities I would trust with data on my internet usage (of any type!). That doesn't even touch all the academics who consider anonymous P2P to be a doomsday device in the same way the right wing sees the second amendment.
[okay, back to obscurity for me, but good for you for thinking about the problem!]
Comments 5
b) The idea of the government being put in a position of deciding what art is, or having any ability to regulate it, is horrifying.
You're missing that.
Reply
The government would not own porn. Nor would the government decide what "art" is. The government would simply manage compensation for artists, who would retain ownership over their own work.
The government would simply be a money-transfer organization - collecting a generalized bandwidth tax, and distributing that to content producers on the basis of how many times their work was downloaded.
No "ownership" would be involved. The Artists collectively would be completely in charge of the corporation. The government would just pay them.
Reply
Reply
Besides - the government wouldn't be paying you to do that, they would be acting as brokers. By downloading your video and paying bandwidth taxes for the right to do so, the consumers would be paying you, albeit somewhat indirectly - i.e. contributing to a general fund with their tax dollars, from which you receive remuneration commensurate with the average number of downloads your material elicits.
Reply
One problem here is that most people making porn (well, to be fair, this probably also applies to a few regular artists) are anonymous amateurs who would chose to stay unpaid unless they could remain anonymous. The government, which would like to know everything about everyone, is about the last entity anyone would trust to run something like that. You would need a lot of internal safeguards.
The problem with tracking downloading is the privacy aspect on the consumer end -- the government is also dead last in the list of entities I would trust with data on my internet usage (of any type!). That doesn't even touch all the academics who consider anonymous P2P to be a doomsday device in the same way the right wing sees the second amendment.
[okay, back to obscurity for me, but good for you for thinking about the problem!]
Reply
Leave a comment