In the Future (2000 and beyond) . . .

In the short term, there appears to be little legislative work that should be done (particularly in the analog realm). On an ad hoc basis vendors should reasonably and without interference factor unauthorized copying into their determination of price. Presently proposed and/or implemented copy-restriction methods (particularly in the analog realm) should not acquire the force of law, and ad hoc techniques for limiting copying should comply with existing statutes.

The volatility of the present technology, combined with the significant amount of time required for the passage of legislation, require proposals that are suitable for implementation at some point in the future rather than now. Considerable care and forethought are called for in anticipating future needs and requirements.

Therefore, it is reasonable to attempt to write legislation that will be most suitable for application at some point in the future (I am proposing a decade hence, or the year 2000, as a convenient point in time to plan for).

By the year 2000 it is reasonable to suppose the following:

   1. That virtually all (99%?) communications and transfer/storage of intellectual property will be conducted in the digital realm;

   2. That most of the specific media in use today (analog tape cassettes, photocopiers, conventional photographs, to name a few) will no longer be in general use;

   3. That present-day conceptual formats for intellectual property (i.e. "stereo," "video," "book," etc.) may no longer be entirely or comprehensively appropriate;

   4. That the speed, cost, reliability and universality of transmission, storage and processing of intellectual property will be at least an order of magnitude more productive than it is now;

   5. That the volume of transmission, storage and processing of intellectual property will be at least an order of magnitude greater than it is now.

Given these suppositions, it is important that we attempt to legislate based on the multiple premises of a highly efficient, rapidly growing and heavily used digital information system that is both volatile and unfixed (and that traffics in formats and products that are not envisioned today while no longer trafficking in many of the formats and products that are staples today).

Therefore, it is reasonable to project and work toward a broad-based approach that documents and compensates for the transfer and use of intellectual property (probably with a system derived from present-day cable television, telephone and credit-card usage and billing), coupled with significantly increased range of compulsory license fees and substantial inhibition of non-documented transfers and copies of information in the digital realm. This may be the most fruitful way to deal with the problem in the middle and long term.

It may also prove worthwhile for the government to encourage the development of a provenance system and a digital realm copy-restriction system within the frameworks of copyright law revision and computer operating systems, as well as to mandate (and perhaps support) minima for compensation for qualified published intellectual property to encourage the continued production of such creative work in the population at large.