Bounty Hunters

Map Makers

&

Gold Miners

Metaphors for Designing

Fair

Intellectual Property Laws

version: 24 May 2007

Copyright 2007 Greg London

This work licensed under the CreativeCommons–Attribution license.

The following information is provided for attribution purposes:

Author's Name: Greg London

Title of Work: Bounty Hunters

URL: http://www.GregLondon.com/cc/by

email at greg london dot com

For the latest version of this work, HTML or PDF, go to:

http://www.greglondon.com

This document was created using OpenOffice

http://www.openoffice.org

running Fedora Linux

http://fedora.redhat.com

on a Penguin x86 PC.

http://www.penguincomputing.com/

18 April 2005: first public draft made available

29 April 2005: fix typos (Thanks to Robinson P. Tryon)

26 May 2005: fix typo (Thanks to Richard Eriksson), remove CC images to reduce bandwidth load, use compressed JPEG image to reduce bandwidth.

2 April 2006: fix links to Bruce Lehman's bio that had changed. Added some court cases to “external links” section, changed proposed term solution to 42 years instead of 40 years.

21 October 2006: change character names in story to avoid misunderstandings with initials.

10 November 2006: fixed numerous typos (Thanks to Ira Snyder, Chris Meadows, Jonathan (peacelovesmusings.blogspot.com) and fatramblings.blogspot.com)

5 December 2006: fixed typos, also trying to fix image resolution mismatch (Thanks to Stacey Sheldon)

24 May 2007: add reference to 56 year terms up to 1976.

1 What Should Be?

In January 2005, Bill Gates had an interview with CNET that included the topic of Intellectual Property (IP) reform. At one point, Bill Gates made a reference to communists. Many reformists became upset, thinking Gates was calling them communist. Later that same month, Gates had an interview with Gizmodo, and the “communist” remark came up in the discussion. Gizmodo asked Gates to clarify his previous comment. Gates replied:

“No, no, no. I didn't say those people were 'communists.' I did say that they're...”

Up to this point, it's all pretty standard. Gates denies any wrong doing. He's about to clarify what exactly he did say IP reformists were, but then he seemed to realize at the last moment that there was no cheese down that tunnel.

Gates then stops, and starts from a new approach. He asks a question that completely changes the topic.

“What incentive systems should exist in the world?” -- Bill Gates

And when I read it, I said “yes, that's exactly it.”

This is an exceedingly important question that keeps getting asked over the centuries of copyright and patent law evolution. The rights and terms for copyrights and patents keep changing over the years. Individuals with large monetary stakes in a written work often push to have the rights and durations of copyright extended in their favor. New writers and inventors complain that these large stakeholders have taken the whole pie for themselves, allowing no one to compete with them. The public seems to be stuck in the middle, wanting to reward writers and inventors, but also wanting competition to drive progress.

I was disappointed as I read further that Gates never answered his own question. And so I was left to ponder it for a while. What struck me most was the wording of the question itself. The words in the question point to an underlying truth of how things work. The question actually points to the answer.

1.1 “What incentive systems should exist in the world?”- Bill Gates

Systems, incentive, should. Three very important words.

1.1.1 “Systems”

Copyright and Patent law are components in a system of players. Individuals have an internal drive to self-interest as well as an internal drive to community-minded behavior or fair play. Copyright and Patent laws are intended to affect that system in a strategic way.

1.1.2 “Incentive”

Copyright and patent law punishes certain behaviors and rewards certain other behaviors. By providing these incentives, copyright and patent law CHANGES the way players behave.

1.1.3 “Should”

Copyright and Patent law is OPTIONAL. The system can operate without the influence of copyright and patent law, and the players will adjust accordingly. Despite dire warnings from some copyright and patent holders, the system of players is inherently stable without legal influences. Chaos will not ensue due to a lack of copyright and patent laws. Rather, players will readjust to a different point of balance.

Since copyright and patent law is optional, the question is when and how SHOULD the law be implemented. Copyright is not something the world MUST have. Copyright is optional and should only be adopted if it creates a win-win situation for the community and the creators.

1.2 Models and Metaphors

What is needed is a model or metaphor that describes the actors in the system with and without intellectual property laws in place. For a model to be useful in determining what legal incentives SHOULD be in place, it must predict what will happen without law, with varying implementations of law, and it must also be able to predict results with fair players and with unfair players.

Once you have a model, you may be able to find a generic algorithm that describes how to find a fair result. If the algorithm produces a fair result with a spectrum of players in the model, then you've found a relatively robust algorithm.

1.3 Cake Cutting

The basic cake cutting algorithm works like this: There is a cake treated as common property between two people. These two people want to find a way to cut the cake such that both of them get a fair piece. A solution is to have one person of the two cut the cake, and then allow the other person to pick which piece they want.

This is a fairly robust algorithm because it will produce a fair result under most circumstances, regardless of how selfish or selfless the actors are. The person cutting the cake has incentive to cut fairly because if one piece is noticeably bigger, the other person will naturally tend to pick that piece, and the person who cut the cake will get a smaller piece. Selfish cake cutters are given incentive to cut fairly.

But there are other algorithms that you could use to cut the cake. For example, you could have one person cut the cake and pick which piece they get. This produces a fair result only if the cake-cutter is a reasonably fair person. The model shows that this algorithm will produce an unfair result if the cake-cutter serves only their self-interest.

Another approach is to bring in a third person to act as an impartial cake-cutter, have them cut the cake, and distribute it accordingly. This is also subject to abuse when unfair players are in the system. The third person acting as impartial cake cutter is an actor the same as any of the other players, and could be filled by various people across the spectrum of selfish to selfless.

A model that relies on finding a “fair” or “impartial” individual for the algorithm to achieve a fair result is not nearly as robust as an algorithm that doesn't care about the internal drives of the players but achieves a fair result anyway.

1.4 A Model / Metaphor for Intellectual Incentive

The cake cutting system does not model all aspects of how intellectual works relate to all the different actors in the system.

So, back to Bill Gates' question: “What incentive systems should exist in the world?”

We need a model or metaphor that describes the system of intellectual works from before the works are created, to while they are treated as property, to the point where they become public domain (public property). We also need the model or metaphor to describe a system where many actors in a system design an “incentive system” for a few of the players.

The answer to this question should produce a model or metaphor that sufficiently simulates a system and allows you to predict conditions that make the system unstable, as well as design algorithms that are stable and fair and robust.

After pondering this for a bit, it occurred to me that the metaphor for this system is that of a bounty or reward offered by the public at large for any individual willing to take personal risk for a chance at successfully collecting the bounty. Writers and inventors in this system play the part of Bounty Hunters.

Before you let any preconceived notions and/or prejudices towards bounty hunters cloud your judgment, keep in mind that the same way a cake-cutting algorithm is usually used for something besides cutting cake, so too the bounty hunter algorithm isn't just used for catching outlaws.

In discussing this “bounty hunter” model to people, most thought of Boba Fett when I said bounty hunter. Boba Fett is a completely selfish bounty hunter in the Star Wars movies, a faceless, anonymous, soulless character who hunts the good guys. And with this character in mind, a lot of negative reactions were expressed towards the metaphor of writers as bounty hunters.

But to react negatively to a metaphor about intellectual property because it involves bounty hunters, is to react negatively to a cake cutting algorithm because you don't like cake. It isn't really about splitting a cake. And it isn't really about Boba Fett.

And so, I present to you a tale of a fictional town named Eureka. Eureka was founded in the frontier of the wild, wild west. And it will see bounty hunters of all types.

Afterwards, we'll look at how the metaphor applies to stuff besides cutting cake and catching outlaws.

2 A Town that Never Was

Once upon a time, there was a town by the name of Eureka. It was a good place built by honest and hardworking folks like farmers and ranchers, carpenters and masons, bankers and railroaders. Life in Eureka was good.

For a while, anyway.

It didn't happen all at once, but troubles slowly beset themselves upon Eureka in the form of organized crime, gangs, and outlaws of various sorts. Sheriff Riley had a small group of deputies that managed to keep the peace with the usual troubles that might arise between good folks who had disagreements between one another or simply too much to drink. But his group was too small to chase after bank robbers and train-robbers and cattle rustlers and horse thieves all at the same time.

Since troubles grew slowly, Sheriff Riley and his deputies focused their efforts on whoever was causing the most trouble at the time. When the Coleman Raiders robbed a string of banks, Sheriff Riley and his deputies tracked them down and brought them to justice. Same thing happened when the Farley Gang robbed several stagecoaches. It wasn't perfect, but it was good enough.

For a while, anyway.

But then Tinker Tyson and his outlaws started robbing trains. The problem was that Tinker was really good at robbing trains and really good at not getting caught. He was as smart as he was brutal. After Tinker and his outlaws robbed six trains and killed over a hundred passengers, the Morgan-Jack Locomotive company threatened to stop all train service to Eureka unless the outlaws were arrested.

Sheriff Riley was a thorough but methodical man and looked at all the places Tinker Tyson could be hiding and all the different tracks where Tinker could find trains to rob. Eureka was in the middle of a vast, untamed territory. Riley told the railroad folks he figured with 150 new deputies, he could guarantee he'd either capture Tinker or force him to move on to another city within a year.

That was no where near soon enough, and the railroad company threatened to cut all service to Eureka unless Tinker Tyson was captured within a month. And they wouldn't come back to Eureka until he was caught.

A whole year without train service would kill the city of Eureka, and the townsfolk knew it. They also knew that even if they could afford to wait a year to flush out Tyson, they could never afford 150 new deputies on the town's payroll.

Victor Clayton, one of the biggest property owners in Eureka, came forward with $25,000 of his own money as a reward for anyone who could bring Tinker Tyson to justice within a month. Clayton knew that if Eureka lost train service, he could lose everything he owned.

The Haskell brothers had heads big enough to think they could take on Tinker Tyson. Unfortunately those big heads weren't filled with the smarts enough to know the difference between causing trouble in a local bar and taking on a band of professional outlaws. Tinker decided to use them as a warning to the others and had them killed. With that, no one else seemed interested in even thinking about collecting the reward. After a week, Clayton raised the reward to $50,000.

This got the interest of a local gunslinger by the name of Garrett who knew a thing or two about trains and the people who robbed them. Garrett also knew a thing or two about the land around and about Eureka and where a train robber might hide. He loaded up on supplies and rode out of town.

After two weeks of false starts, old trails, and dead ends, Garrett tracked Tinker Tyson and his outlaws to an abandoned silver mine in the mountains. Garrett had three sticks of dynamite, a spool of wire and a plunger that he used to even up the odds a bit. The rest of it was settled with an old-fashioned gunfight. Three weeks after he left Eureka, and one day before Clayton's deadline, Garrett rode back into town with Tinker's body to collect his reward.

The people of Eureka welcomed Garrett as a hero. Clayton gladly paid the bounty knowing that he wouldn't become the largest property owner in a ghost town. Train service to Eureka continued uninterrupted. Garrett told the Sheriff about the abandoned mine and Riley decided to plant explosives and collapse it so that no one could use it as a hideout again.

John Maddox, the Mayor of Eureka, saw the benefit of having bounty hunters as a supplement to the regular law enforcement for the city. The Bennett Boys had robbed the Savings and Loans for half a million dollars six months ago and Sheriff Riley had not captured them yet. And some of the ranchers had been complaining about cattle rustlers enough for the Mayor to know it weren't all just bellyaching.

But Mayor Maddox knew the people of Eureka couldn't afford to pay the taxes needed to offer a $25,000 or $50,000 bounty. Maddox had the idea that Eureka could spread the payments out over a period of time, so that the payments were small enough for Eureka to afford it, but the total was big enough to interest someone like Garrett into getting the job done.

Maddox proposed the idea at the next town meeting. Eureka would offer a bounty of $25,000 over a period of 25 years for the capture of the Bennett Boys. Sheriff Riley thought it would be a great way to split up the work. He and his deputies could take care of the day to day business of keeping law and order. And bounty hunters could be used to take care of the random villains who fed off of the good folks of Eureka. The people of Eureka thought a thousand dollars a year was dirt cheap to get the Bennett Boys off their streets.

Four months later, Isaac Preston hauled the Bennett Boys into town and started collecting his reward.

Crime went down in Eureka, and the town grew into a metropolis. Preston and other bounty hunters collected rewards when trouble arose. As he got older, Preston formed his own company, IP Inc. Eureka had grown so big that Preston could afford to hire employees. Garrett continued working as a solo act, bringing in the occasional bad guy for a reward. Everyone was happy.

For a while, anyway.

Twenty-three years after he brought in the Bennett Boys, Isaac Preston started to get a little nervous. His annual bounty payment for the Bennett Boys would stop in two years as would two other annual payments. He had four annual bounty payments that would end in three years. And over a dozen payments he was getting every year that would dry up in four years.

He was going to have a serious cash flow problem soon. So Preston decided to pay a visit to Mayor Maddox.

“It just isn't fair, Mayor. I did all that work, risked life and limb, and brought in the Bennett Boys for a mere $25,000.”

“That was the reward offered by the city of Eureka. You didn't have to take the job.”

“Yes, but the Bennett Boys stole half a million dollars and were planning on hitting another bank when I caught them. They could have taken millions before Sheriff Riley had caught them. And I only got $25,000. It just doesn't seem fair.”

“But you shouldn't have taken the job for $25,000 if you didn't think it fair.”

“And that same year, I brought in Rex and his bunch when they were rustling cattle. Remember?”

“Sure, I re-”

“And those cattle were worth an awful lot more than the $15,000 reward that Eureka offered. Heck, the Langrie herd was over three hundred head of cattle alone!”

“But then why-”

“And the other thing is that inflation has been so bad the last few years that a thousand dollars a year just isn't worth what it was twenty-some years ago. Even if you don't increase the rewards, you should raise them just to keep up with inflation otherwise a thousand dollars a year just isn't enough.”

“Well, I don't know. I mean, what exactly did you have in mind?”

“Look, Mayor, I'm not a greedy man. I just want my due. I'll tell you what. $50,000 seems fair for saving the city what would have turned into millions of dollars of thievery and who knows how many dead folks. Don't you think?”

“But Eureka can't afford $50,000.”

“It's just another $25,000. And you can spread it out over the next 25 years like before.”

“I ... guess ... we could handle that.”

“And another $30,000 should more than cover saving a thousand head of prime Midwestern beef.”

“Thirty thousand?”

“Uh huh. The way I see it, if Eureka just doubles how long it makes its payments, then it will work out even steven.”

“Double?”

“Well, isn't $50,000 fair for saving the city half a million dollars?”

“I suppose.”

“And isn't $30,000 fair for saving a thousand head of cattle?”

“I reckon it is.”

“Well, there you have it then. This is really just making adjustments for inflation and bringing the rewards in line with the benefit I provided.”

“I guess I could bring it up at the town meeting next month.”

“Thank you, Mayor. I would appreciate that.”

A week later, Mayor Maddox received a campaign contribution from Isaac Preston along with a note saying “Eureka wouldn't be the same without you as Mayor.”

At the next town meeting, Mayor Maddox brought up an item concerning “inflation adjustment for bounties” and suggested that bounties need to be adjusted for inflation by doubling how long they make the payments. The townsfolk scratched their heads but figured the Mayor must know what he was talking about, and on his recommendation, they approved the measure.

Eureka continued to grow and prosper. The crime per capita continued to drop. But there were enough crimes that Preston and his company kept a brisk business of bringing in bad guys. The number of employees increased. Preston brought in his son, Irving, to work the business. Garrett, who had always worked alone as a bounty hunter, became a duo when he started showing his son, Galen, the ropes of the bounty hunter business. Even Maddox passed the torch to his son when Mitchell became the new Mayor of Eureka. Everyone was happy.

For a while, at least.

'Twas a sad day indeed when Preston and Garrett were both killed in a shootout while trying to round up the Kirby twins who had kidnapped one of Eureka's daughters. IP Inc and Garrett's son were there when it happened. The Kirby twins died in the shootout as well. The kidnapped girl was rescued, but it was the only good thing to come of that otherwise dark day.

A week later, Irving approached the Mayor.

“It's a sad day, Mayor Mitchell.”

“Yes, truly it is.”

“My pa is in the ground, and his works will follow soon after.”

“What's that?”

“Well, all the good things that my pa did for Eureka, and his rewards are gonna dry up soon.”

“You mean the bounties the city has been paying him?”

“Sure. And it just don't see right to me that he gave his life but will so soon be forgotten.”

“Forgotten? We're planning on erecting a statue in his honor. And another one for Garrett too.”

“But to give his life and to have his rewards end so soon after his death. It just doesn't seem fair.”

“Well, your pa and Garrett both knew the risks involved in trying to collect the bounty and they decided it was worth the risk.”

“Yes, but how can you put a price on a man's life?”

“Well, I'm not saying...”

“My pa devoted his life to helping Eureka. Don't you think it only fair that Eureka give him his due?”

“His due?”

“Yes, his due. He spent 50 years of his life making Eureka a better place. He should be rewarded for 50 years.”

“Your pa has gone to meet his maker. He don't care about no earthly reward. Besides, how would he collect?”

“But a man who gave his life for us should be allowed his legacy.”

“Well, like I said, the statue...”

“It don't pay for a man's life.”

“Well, I reckon it don't.” The mayor seemed stumped. “What did you have in mind?”

“50 years of a life dedicated to making Eureka a better place should be rewarded for 50 years after his death. I think it only fair that Eureka extend all its bounty payments to my father's estate for 50 years after his death.”

“That seems like an awful lot of money, Irving. I don't know if Eureka could afford it.”

“My pa gave 50 years of his life to this city, and all you can think of is the money?”

“I'm sorry, Irving, I didn't mean to be selfish.” The mayor pondered it for a moment. “I'm sure we can figure out a way to pay your father's estate.”

“Thank you mayor.”

A week later, Mayor Mitchell received a campaign contribution from Irving along with a bounty hunter's badge and a certificate that proclaimed Mayor Mitchell an honorary bounty hunter.

Mayor Mitchell called a special town meeting and gave an emotional speech about the sacrifices made by the bounty hunters Preston and Garrett. He proposed that to keep their legacy alive, their bounty awards should all be extended until 50 years from their death. The speech was a real tear-jerker.

A few folks tried to question the validity of some of Mitchell's emotional claims. Some tried to ask about the source of his campaign contributions and his status as honorary bounty hunter. A couple of independent bounty hunters said they would be willing to bring in the bad guys for the usual size bounty, that they didn't need payments for 50 years after their death. But all these nay-sayers were booed out of the meeting room. And the “Bounty Hunter Legacy Act” became law.

Galen, son of Garrett, had not been at the meeting because he was out in the mountains on the trail of a stagecoach bandit. After some time, he followed the bandit to an old shack in the hills, and there, Galen captured him. Galen hauled him back to Eureka and told the sheriff about the shack. The sheriff sent some deputies out to tear down the shack, and then he gave Galen a receipt for his reward. Galen looked at it and was surprised to see it say he'd get paid his reward for 50 years after his death.

“What am I going to do with reward money when I'm dead, sheriff?”

“You can pass it to your kin.”

“I don't have any kin. And besides, if I did and they helped me bring in this guy, I'd split the reward with them now. That's what my pa did when we rode together. I wouldn't make anyone who pulled pistols beside me to wait until after I died before they got paid.”

“Eureka passed an ordinance that all bounties are to be paid until 50 years after the bounty hunter dies.”

“Well, I set out to catch that stagecoach bandit for a lot less than that. I won't take it. Just give me the old reward.”

“The law says I have to pay you a bounty for 50 years after you die. I'm the sheriff, and I can't break the law.”

“But the town don't have to pay me that much.”

“You'll have to talk with the Mayor about making an exception.”

Galen rode over to visit Mayor Mitchell. The mayor was overseeing the construction of his new office.

“Mighty fine building you're putting up there, mayor.”

“Galen, fellow bounty hunter, how are you?”

“Fellow bounty hunter? You never had hot lead flying at you your whole life. What are you talking about?”

“I'm an honorary member only, of course. Irving even gave me a badge and certificate and everything.”

“Irving, aye?”

“Yes, sir. Good ol' Irving. He's been supporting the Mayor's office since he took over IP Inc.”

“Supporting the office?” Galen was more than a little suspect. “Or supporting you?”

“Well, the taxes his company pays is part of what's paying for this new building for the mayor's office.”

“Wait a minute. You tax the people of Eureka so that you can pay our bounties. And then you tax the bounties to pay for your buildings? Don't that seem odd?”

“It's all perfectly legal.”

“But you pass the laws around here, so you're the one making it legal. And your laws are set up so that the more Irving benefits the more you benefit, and the citizens are the one footing the bill.”

“It's all very complicated, Galen. You make it sound as if I were stealing something from the very citizens I represent.”

“You keep having the people pay bigger and bigger bounties to Irving. And then Irving turns around and uses those huge bounties to give you a big fat campaign contribution. Over in Dodge City, they call that a kickback and it's illegal.”

“Dodge City is overrun with criminals. We pay bounties that are generous enough that bounty hunters will bring the criminals off the streets.”

“Dodge City has no more crime than we do. And they pay out a lot less in bounties, which is why I came here in the first place. I don't want a bounty that lasts 50 years after I die. The people of Eureka shouldn't have to pay me that much.”

“I can't be making special exceptions for every bounty hunter that wants to negotiate a different price.”

“You did for Irving. It's just that he negotiated the price up and gave you a piece of the action.”

“Look, Galen. If you think the people are paying too high a bounty, you can keep what you think is fair, and give the rest of it back to the people.”

“Meanwhile, Irving is making out like a bandit and you keep getting your piece of the pie.”

“I don't expect you to understand the nuances of how government works, so I'll take that comment as a reflection of your ignorance.”

“Oh, I know how it works alright, and it stinks like Sam's slaughterhouse on a hot summer day.”

Galen turned and left before Maddox could reply.

Galen rode off to Charlie's Cantina, one of Eureka's more wretched dives. It was where Galen usually went after collecting a bounty to celebrate. It was also where he went when he needed to find extra gunslingers to help him on a particular job. And when things went bad, it was the place where Galen went to drown his sorrows.

Galen drank three men under the table and threw two more out the front door before he settled down into a corner with a bottle to brood.

Most folk forgot he was even there. What exactly happened next, no one knows for sure. But half a dozen people who were closest to him say they saw Galen stagger to his feet with bloodshot eyes swaying like a pine in a cyclone, mumbling “guns and money ... guns and money ...” over and over to himself. Then all of a sudden his eyes widened and everyone heard him scream one word before he staggered out of the bar.

“Lawyers!”

Eureka only had but so many lawyers living within city limits. Unfortunately for Lantry Landon, his house happened to be closest to Charlie's Cantina. And Galen staggered down the street to pound on Lantry's door in the middle of the night.

“Now let me get this straight, Galen. You want to set up a trust fund where you'll contribute a part of your bounties and make that trust available to anyone willing to go collect on other bounties?”

“With the extra stipulation.”

“Right. That anyone who takes from the trust to collect a bounty must donate to the trust a a percentage of their collected bounties as well.”

“Yessir, exactly that.”

Lantry looked at Galen a moment. “How much whiskey you got in you right now?”

“Look, you old cuss. I can shoot straighter now than you ever could.”

“But it don't make sense, Galen.”

“Why the hell not, damn it! Say you got some kid who's pretty sharp in the head, fast on the draw, and has a good sense for trouble. Say he's the kind of person who could collect on a bounty. But say he ain't got the money to do it. Maybe he ain't got no guns or ammo. Maybe he ain't got a horse of his own.”

“Yeah, the setup I get, it's what follows that don't add up.”

“So, say this kid can borrow some money from this trust fund to buy a horse. But he don't actually borrow it in the sense of ever having to pay it back directly. Say he gets to withdraw the money on the condition that if he does bring in a bad guy and collect a bounty, and say he used that horse to do it, then he has to give some of that bounty back to the trust.”

“But how do you keep the lunkheads from bleeding you dry.”

“I'll pick who gets the first loans. And of those, everyone who is successful, gets a bounty, and has to contribute to the trust, gets added to the trust as a voting member. And every time someone new wants to borrow money, all current members vote on whether to give it to him or not.”

“OK, so you get this self-sustaining, possibly growing, trust fund going on for all eternity. The math adds up, I reckon. But there's still a part that just don't make sense to me.”

“What's that?”

“Why would you do such a thing?”

“Because Irving and Maddox are milking Eureka dry, and that ain't right. And because I can't think of any other way of showing folks that they're being taken advantage of than to show that we can collect bounties for a lot less money.”

Lantry was too tired to argue and just nodded.

The next morning, Lantry filled out all the paperwork and set up a trust account at the bank. He then dropped off copies with Galen.

Galen went down to Charlie's Cantina to find his first recruits. He had worked with many of the bounty hunters who hung out there. He explained the trust to each one of them. Some of them thought him crazy. Other's nodded their head with a “it's just crazy enough to work” look in their eyes.

Wyatt was the first to take him up on his offer. He wanted to get himself one of them new Winchester semiautomatic rifles with a scope. Wyatt went to Lantry who had him sign the paperwork and gave him his money. A month later, Wyatt brought in an outlaw by the name of Tillman and signed his reward over to the trust. The trust then paid him what was his due.

Galen's trust grew into a huge success. It grew to the point where people borrowing from and contributing back to the trust were regularly competing with IP Inc for the same bounties. Once it started cutting into his bottom line, Irving visited the mayor.

“It just isn't fair, Mayor. These trust-fund kids are going to put us out of business. You've got to put a stop to them.”

“The whole idea of a bounty system is to encourage competition.”

“Well, a bunch of rank amateurs are going to put a professional corporation out of business if this keeps up. Do you want nothing but a bunch of amateurs between Eureka and the scum of the earth?”

“If they're successful, then why would Eureka care?”

“Need I remind you of the wagon-loads of money I pay you in campaign contributions every year? Or the amount of taxes that IP Inc pays every year?”

“Well, there isn't much I can do. I can't just outlaw this bunch because they're competing with you.”

“I have an idea. I want you to pass a law that lets us put bounty claims on any hideouts that we find.”

“Bounty Claims?”

“Yep. If we catch a bad guy hiding out someplace, we want a claim so that we can purchase the land, and then we get rights to any outlaw caught hiding out on our land.”

“How will that help?”

“The trust fund kids won't be able to purchase any land, so we'll eventually be able to lock them out of all the hideout locations. Once they can't collect bounties from these areas, we'll just squeeze them out over time.”

“I don't think I can get city council to approve that.”

“I'll make them all honorary bounty hunters and start contributing to all their campaigns.”

“Passing a law is too visible. What I'll do is appoint one of your men to be Commissioner of the Land Deeds office. The commissioner can set office policy as he sees fit.”

“I've got just the man.”

At the next town meeting, the Mayor motioned to appoint Darrell Dawson as new Commissioner of Land Deeds. No one knew the importance of the fact that Darrell had been getting checks from IP Inc. in one form or another for the last twenty years, and Darrell received the appointment. Within three months, Darrell quietly distributed his new policies for the Deeds office. Included in these policies was a new policy that allowed bounty hunters to purchase any undeeded land upon which they had captured an outlaw.

No one thought much of it at the time.

Then Galen caught a bank robber hiding out in the badlands and brought him to the sheriff to collect his reward.

“Good job, Galen. Here's your receipt. You should be getting your first check in a week or two.”

“Thanks, Sheriff.”

“Oh, and you can take your receipt down to the deeds office if you want to purchase the bounty rights on that piece of land where you caught this guy.”

“Bounty Rights?”

“Sure. That land hasn't been deeded to anyone yet, so if you want, you can take that receipt to the Deeds office and buy it and the bounty rights that go with it.”

“I'm putting a portion of my reward into the trust. I can't afford to buy land.”

“Well, if you don't and someone else does, they'll be able to claim the rights to any outlaw captured on their land, regardless of who captured them.”

Less than fifteen minutes later, Galen stormed into Mayor Mitchell's office to find the Mayor and Irving having a friendly drink together.

“Well, I'll be damned.” Galen strode into the room shaking his head. “That explains a lot.”

“What burr you got under your saddle today, Galen?” Irving chuckled.

“You know old man Grady just a couple miles east of town?”

“Sure. Did Grady sell you a chicken that won't lay eggs? Is that what's got your rope in knots?”

“Grady's got some of the finest hens around Eureka. And he's got his dog Blue to guard them from any foxes or coyotes.”

“And what's that got to do with the price of gold in Eureka?”

“I figure I feel about what Grady would feel like if he walked in on Blue and some coyote sharing the same water dish.”

“You've been in the sun too long, Galen. You need to get some rest.”

“Mitchell, who's interest are you supposed to protect and guard?”

“Eureka's interests, of course.”

“Like main street ever voted for you or 123 Pine St can sign a ballot.”

“Well, the people of Eureka, of course.”

“And how do you get off betraying the trust of the people of Eureka, taxing them more than they need so that Irving here can become one of the richest men in town?”

“Irving provides a valuable service that benefits this whole town.”

“So do I, you old snake. And my team and I would do the same job for a lot less if you'd just let me.”

“What are you rambling about, Galen? I'm not stopping you from doing anything.”

“I can't afford to buy no bounty rights to some piece of land when I'm giving part of my bounties to the trust.”

“That isn't my problem, Galen. The law is fair. It lets anyone buy those rights. If you want to buy them, and you have the money, you can.”

“But I'm trying to prove that we can bring in the bad guys for a lot less money, and you change the system to favor whoever has more money and can afford to buy land to collect bounties.”

“Well, I can't feel too sorry for you when you're a member of the trust you're giving money to. As far as I can tell, you're just creating a pyramid scheme to make yourself rich. At the very least, you're making the same amount of money as Irving here per bounty, you're just moving it around on paper.”

“I can't touch any money in the trust without everyone's approval, same as any other bounty hunter who wants to borrow money. And the trust started paying out benefits to victims of crime two months ago. So we're not keeping all the money to ourselves. I still live on my pa's old place. But Irving here is one of the biggest land owners in Eureka.”

“So Irving kept his money and you didn't. That ain't his fault.”

“I'm trying to bring in the bad guys without Eureka paying so much money in bounties.”

“If that's what you want to do, Galen, then that's perfectly legal.”

“Yeah, but now this Bounty Rights thing is going to make it so that only people who keep all their reward will be able to buy Bounty Rights and stay in business. I can't do it for less money without getting squeezed out by Irving and his great land grabbing machine of IP Inc.”

“What's wrong with rewarding bounty hunters with land rights?”

“Because it encourages and rewards a monopoly. And it ain't natural. Before this law, I could chase after a bad guy anywhere he went. Anyone could. Competition was encouraged. Success was rewarded.”

“This is rewarding successful bounty hunters.”

“Sure, by giving them a permanent monopoly. By outlawing competition on their land. Now, I might flush some bad guy out of hiding, and if he happens to run onto Irving's land, I lose out because of some artificial rule you made up. And Irving gets to collect after I acted like his bird dog. My success is punished every time a bad guy runs onto Irving's land. And the fact that I'm Bounty Hunting for less money is punished because I can't afford to buy land and compete with Irving.”

“The law isn't meant to punish, Galen. It is meant to be a reward.”

“A reward for you. Irving keeps making more and more money. And you keep getting more and more fat, brown envelopes full of cash. And all of it paid for by the people of Eureka paying far more for bounties than they need to.”

“Eureka pays what it considers to be a fair price for bounties.”

“Whatever happened to getting the lowest professional bid for a job? Isn't that what Eureka should pay? Shouldn't it be the lowest bounty that will get the job done? The bounty that keeps Irving here in silk cowboy hats and a thousand acre ranch is corporate welfare.”

At this, Irving finally spoke up.

“Galen, you're starting to sound like a communist. Is that what you are? Someone who doesn't believe in property rights? That's all these Bounty Rights are, after all: property rights. Are you anti-capitalist? Is that it? Because you don't seem to like the fact that I make money off of my work.”

“Irving, you haven't slung lead in years. You're lazy and comfortable and you're using your position to keep yourself cozy. In itself, I wouldn't care a plugged nickel about you or how you live. But the thing is that you're living the way you are by enforcing a monopoly on the people, granted in part by the purchase of a few political offices. And that really burns my bacon. Capitalism is about competition. And in that sense, I'm all capitalist. I know my bounty hunter trust is growing. And I know we're doing the same job as you for a hell of a lot less money. And that means only one thing...”

He pointed a finger at Irving in a flash of movement and Irving flinched.

“In the long run,” Galen finished, “I'll beat you.”

Galen turned and walked out the door.

3 Art Imitates Life

It's a lousy place to end a story. But unfortunately, the story of Eureka and it's bounty hunters is a metaphor for the history of intellectual works. The current state of affairs around intellectual works places Irving in the mayor's office, sharing a drink and a cigar. As much as I'd like to write a happy ending for the good people of Eureka, I can't.

How does Eureka act as a metaphor for intellectual works? In the early days of Eureka, crime is a problem that could only be solved by someone putting in the work needed to get the bad guys off the street. The lack of law enforcement in Eureka is equivalent to the lack of writing or invention in our world. Both require individuals to do the work to fix the problem.

Creating intellectual works is a service industry, the way a sheriff provides a service of enforcing the law. The term “Intellectual Works” reflects the work or labor needed to create the writing or invention.

Do not let someone fool you into thinking that writing and inventing is a manufacturing industry because they create “Intellectual Property.” Intellectual works existed long before the laws came along and allowed them to be turned into intellectual property.

An intellectual work is intangible. A book is not an intellectual work; the meaning contained in the words is the intellectual work. The intellectual work in an invention is not the iron and wood of the machine, but the design and function the machine performs.

Do not commit the logical fallacy of reification, treating an abstract concept as if it were a concrete, physical thing. The books that carry the words, the machines that perform the functions, are made by printing presses and assembly lines. Intellectual works are not manufactured things.

3.0.0.1 Intellectual works are abstract ideas created by the labor of human minds.

3.1 Wild Frontier

The story of Eureka starts with no bounty hunters, no bounties, no rewards. Eureka slowly becomes aware of its distinct problem with crime. And this problem requires a solution.

Our history of intellectual works starts in 1440, with the invention of the Gutenberg press. A scribe copying a book by hand produced about one book per year. A Gutenberg press produced several hundred books a year. Literacy rates slowly started going up. People could exchange ideas. This fueled the renaissance, which started in the 1300's in Italy and in the 1500's in northern Europe. The renaissance was a revolution in science and art considered the birth of the modern world.

This time was the Wild West of intellectual works. Mankind slowly became aware of its problem with respect to intellectual ideas. Art and Science became a seemingly endless series of problems to solve.

With this vast, untamed intellectual territory, it seems almost natural that someone like Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) came along and threw himself into a multitude of disciplines. He painted, sculpted, invented and designed all manner of intellectual works. His disciplines ranged from anatomy to astronomy.

William Shakespeare (1564-1616) is considered the greatest writer in English. His works survive and thrive to this day.

Inventors up until this time made money as craftsman, not as inventors. A craft, such as shipbuilding, could take a lifetime to learn, so even if someone knew the idea underneath a new invention, they didn't have the skill to build it.

Printing presses were becoming common. But literacy rates were still not exceedingly high, so someone like William Shakespeare paid for the labor of writing his plays by performing them with his theater group.

The incentive systems at this time were part of the evolution of the crafts and of writing. People found ways to write and invent and pay for their labor through other means. Writers were paid for their writing by performing their works. Inventors were paid for their creativity by using their craftsmen skills to build them.

What made this system of incentives start to evaporate was the advent of steam power, the industrial revolution, and wide-spread literacy. The first industrial steam engine was built around 1700. Craftsmanship was replaced with mass production. Widespread literacy meant widespread science and scientific papers. The result of a lot of scientific research might produce its most valuable work in a book and might not translate well to other forms of employment.

3.1.1 The First Outlaw

The story of Eureka first came to a head when Tinker Tyson started robbing trains. Crime had slowly grown over time in Eureka. But Tinker Tyson made it abundantly clear that crime had become a problem in the city.

The problem of writing began to show up in the 1600's. Literacy was high enough that there were a lot of people who might buy books. And with such a potential customer base, the idea of making a living strictly on your writings had become an appealing idea. The world had reached a point where a learned man could write a useful book, but had no means of ensuring he could make a living just by selling books.

The problem with inventions began to show up around the same time. The British Empire was built firmly on its sea power by the late 1600's. Exploration and colonization of the New World was a lucrative business. However, navigation up to this point could only determine a ship's latitude, not its longitude. Not knowing your longitude had several expensive repercussions, not the least of which that ships sometimes sank and men died because they didn't know exactly where they were.

The way crime came to a head in Eureka with Tinker Tyson and his band of outlaws, so too did the need for intellectual works come to a head with the need for useful books and the need to solve the longitude problem.

3.1.2 The Hostage Scenario

In our story about Eureka, the city could have simply waited for someone to come along and round up Tinker Tyson for free. There was nothing that would have prevented one of Eureka's citizens to ride into town and clean up crime. An independent enforcer could have donated his time and energy going around the city, chasing after the Tinker and his outlaws, and bringing them into justice for free. This individual would risk life and limb for the benefit of everyone in town.

Should Eureka rely on this happening? Should Eureka rely on some masked crusader saving their town for free? Or should Eureka create some incentive system to solve its problem with crime? That's the question to be answered here: What incentive systems should exist in the world?

It turns out that from a game-theory point of view, this is a derivative of a “Prisoners Dilemma” called a “Hostage Scenario”. Imagine a criminal takes a hundred people hostage. He has a revolver with 6 bullets and a belt of ammo. The criminal makes some demands to the authorities (money, escape, whatever) or he'll kill a hostage in some time frame (say 2 hours). At this point, every hostage has a 99 in 100 chance of surviving the next hour of the ordeal.

If one of the hostages decides to take on the criminal and fight him, that hostage is unarmed and has a 5 in 100 chance of surviving (if they're lucky), and they have a 95 in 100 chance of getting shot before they overpower the criminal.

The choices are (1) go along quietly (99 in 100 chance of surviving) or (2) fight (5 in 100 chance of surviving). With these odds, the individual has a much better odds going along with the ordeal than trying to fight. The thing is that these odds apply to EVERY hostage as an individual, so every hostage will have a great incentive to go along quietly and hope they survive.

In our story, Eureka should not sit around and wait for one of its citizens to volunteer to bring in the bad guys.

(side note: It turns out that in a “Prisoner's Dilemma” game, the prisoners can come to a better outcome for themselves if they cooperate. In a hostage scenario, the odds for fighting back improve greatly if all the hostages work together and can overwhelm the criminal. There is still individual risk, but as a group, the hostages have a much better chance to subdue the criminal and win their freedom. If the hostage taker isn't suicidal and packed with explosives, a coordinated group response can be successful. We'll address this option later.)

So, what sort of incentive system should exist?

Some incentive needs to exist that would offset the risk that an individual would have to take. In our story of Eureka, this happens when Mr. Clayton offers Eureka's first bounty.

3.1.3 The First Bounty on Earth

Tinker Tyson was on the loose, killing people and robbing trains. The sheriff was too undermanned to take on Tyson. Victor Clayton decided to offer a $25,000 reward to anyone who can bring in Tinker Tyson.

The history of intellectual works also has the first bounties for writing and inventions.

In 1710, the Statute of Anne was passed by the British government. It is the first copyright law in human history. And it rewarded authors with exclusive rights to copy and print their work for twenty-one years, requiring printers to get the author's permission to make copies of their books. The statute explains its reasoning for doing this as “for the Encouragement of Learned Men to Compose and Write useful Books.”

In 1714, the British government offered a prize for anyone who could design a way to determine a ship's longitude. The prize was between 10,000 and 20,000 British pounds, depending on how accurate the solution was. Some people attempted to come up with a solution, but none collected the prize. A clock maker by the name of John Harrison came up with a solution that would work but required a mechanical clock that was more accurate than had ever been built before and could operate on the rolling deck of a ship. He started working on the clock design in 1730. It took him over 30 years to do it, but in 1761, he presented a clock design that was accurate enough to qualify to win the prize.

3.1.4 Measuring Success (Catching the Bad Guy)

Clayton's bounty was pretty specific. Capture or kill Tinker Tyson and bring his body back to town before the railroad company stopped train service to Eureka. Whoever succeeded in doing that first, got the $25,000 reward (later raised to $50,000).

The longitude prize was fairly specific as well. Discover a way to determine the longitude of a ship within one degree.

But how do you define success when the bad guy is unknown at the time you determine the bounty to be offered? And if you don't know how bad the bad guy is, how can you determine a fair bounty system for all future criminals?

For criminals, you might be able to create a bounty chart that listed bounties based on the crimes the person is wanted for. A horse thief goes for $1,000. A bank robber goes for $2,000. And so on.

For the arts and sciences, you could come up with a chart that paid 5 cents a word for fiction and 10 cents a word for non-fiction writing. Drawings could get paid $100 per canvas or sheet for art and $500 a page for technical diagrams. The problem then is that you've set the price, but you have no way of measuring success. You have no way of determining if the work handed in by the person in front of you is actually worth the 10 cents a page or not.

This actually happens now and then when you hear a story about a government endowment for the arts that was given to some painter or sculptor. The reason the story makes the news is because the painter took the money and turned in a white canvas with a black dot in the middle of it. Or the sculptor took the money and turned in some scrap iron from the local junkyard that he welded together. The local citizens are up in arms because their tax money went to fund something they think is a waste.

It turns out that the solution to this problem is simple in concept and ingenious in its design.

What the British government did was to turn the endowment for the arts into a voluntary tax system. The Statute of Anne took an abstract thing that was the writing and ideas in a book, and declared it to be a thing, the exclusive property of the author. Anyone who wanted a copy of this abstract thing would have to get permission from the author, which the author would likely grant for a small fee.

The government decided that they didn't want to tax the people and use that money to fund some large and unwieldy endowment for the arts program. They wisely foresaw the people complaining of all the new taxes and how the money was being spent on all sorts of stupid books. Instead, the government decided they would give writers ownership of their abstract work as if it were their exclusive property, and as exclusive property, the author could then sell copies of the work to readers.

Rather than pay taxes for a massive endowment for the arts program, people would pay money to an author for a book they wanted to read. The government extracted itself from a lot of headaches and complaints, and left it to the people to decide if they wanted to pay an individual endowment for the arts by buying a copy of some author's book.

It was then simply a matter of picking how long was long enough for the book to be treated as the exclusive property of the author. Up until the Statute of Anne, intellectual works existed only in their natural state as abstract ideas. The new law would require everyone treat the abstract idea as if it were the physical property of the author. But this only lasted for a while, and then the legal encumbrances would fall away and it would be a simple abstract idea again. So the question was how long should an idea be treated like property.

What sort of incentive system should exist?

This is where the bounty hunter metaphor is extremely important. The community decides on some amount for an award, and then they see if any individuals take them up on their offer. Clayton offered $25,000 to bring in Tinker Tyson. It turned out that this didn't get anyone who could actually do the job interested in the reward. So Clayton raised the reward to $50,000.

In 1710, the British government settled on 21 years as being long enough to treat a book as the exclusive property of the author. After 21 years, the abstract work contained in the book was treated like any other abstract idea, and anyone could copy it, use it, etc. The author was given 21 years to sell their book, and if they didn't make their money by that time, they were out of luck.

3.1.5 Winner Take All

Clayton offered one bounty to the first person who succeeded in bringing in Tinker Tyson. He didn't offer money for runner ups. He didn't offer money on an hourly basis. It was a winner-take-all contest.

This creates risk for all bounty hunters. Not everyone who starts out looking for a bad guy is going to catch him and collect the bounty. Some people aren't cut out to be a bounty hunter but have to learn the hard way. Some people would make a good bounty hunter, but might miss a clue and miss nabbing the bad guy. Several experienced bounty hunters might be going after the same bad guy.

Only the first person to catch the bad guy gets any bounty.

This is actually a good design element of our incentive system. It encourages people to achieve results quickly. The first one to get the bad guy wins. Catching the bad guys sooner is better than later, and this system rewards “sooner”.

It also means that failure does not cost the person offering the bounty anything. Clayton offered $25,000 bounty on Tinker Tyson's head. But he didn't have to pay a red cent for the Haskel brothers going after Tinker stone drunk and getting themselves killed.

The first copyright system worked the same way, offering a 21 year exclusive bounty to the first person who wrote something. Patent law (which we'll get to later) gives the first person to register a new invention the exclusive rights to that invention. This gives incentive for people to write and invent new works.

Success is rewarded by sales of the book or invention to the public. Failures cost the community nothing. The risk is on the authors and inventors to be successful, to create something the public wants. If someone who can't write worth a hoot keeps cranking out books that no one buys, he is the only one who loses anything.

3.1.6 Cutting Cake for Bounty Hunters

Our incentive system is looking good so far.

Think of a bounty system as a modified cake cutting algorithm.

The cake is community property. The community wants some bad guy caught or some intellectual idea discovered. The community offers a piece of cake as a bounty to the first person who brings in the bad guy. The community picks some size as an initial offer and waits to see if anyone collects. If no one collects, the community offers a bigger piece of cake, and so on, until someone collects.

Since only the first person to catch the bad guy gets the bounty, there is pressure between the bounty hunters to get the bad guy as quickly as possible, for the lowest price possible, or someone else might take the piece of cake. But the piece must also be big enough to pay for the time, energy, and expenses to catch the bad guy, which pushes the size of the bounty to some minimum. But first-success-collects puts pressure on the bounty hunters to do the job as efficiently as possible, so they can take the first bounty offered and still make money.

The community, obviously, wants to offer as little cake as possible to get the job done.

In the end, the bounty hunter cake cutting algorithm settles on the smallest piece of cake that will get the job done as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

And the algorithm is robust because it will tend to this solution for many types of individuals for varying levels of selfishness.

3.2 The First American Bounty

In 1787, the Constitution was ratified by the states. Section 8 of the Constitution granted Congress the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"

To catch a bad guy ==> To promote the progress of science and useful arts

A bounty shall be offered ==> Creators shall have exclusive rights for a limited time to their works

It was then left up to Congress to determine what rights should be secured and for what duration. Three years later, the Copyright Act of 1790 granted Authors the right to print and publish their work for 14 years and to renew for another 14 years. Registration of the Writing with the Library of Congress was required for protection. The Writing had to contain a Copyright Notice to be protected. (i.e. Copyright 2004 Greg London) Works that are not registered or do not contain a notice are not protected and remain freely available to anyone.

3.2.1 Isaac Preston pays a visit to Mayor Maddox.

In our story of Eureka, something goes wrong with the bounty hunter cake cutting algorithm, and it happens when Isaac Preston pays his first visit to Mayor Maddox. The point of the algorithm is to settle on the lowest price that will get the job done as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

Isaac Preston, however, was a silver tongued devil, and he convinced the Mayor that the bounty should be readjusted based on the value of the service provided. The Bennett Boys stole half a million dollars, and Rex rustled over three hundred head of cattle, so Preston argued that the bounty should be based on the value of the result, rather than on the amount of work it took Preston to catch the bad guys in the first place.

The original algorithm settled on the lowest price that would get the job done as quickly and as efficiently as possible. The original algorithm was also robust, and settled on this price even if the players covered a wide spectrum of morals. The original algorithm was objective: offer a low bounty and then raise it until someone takes it.

The new algorithm paid more for the job than needed. It still rewarded quickness, but efficiency was no longer necessary, so Preston had extra money to hire a lot of extra help. The new algorithm was also subjective, requiring the community to determine the value of catching the bad guy, rather than simply focusing on how much it cost to catch him. And once any algorithm becomes subjective, it requires some of the players to be fair and independent, but requiring a player be fair makes the entire algorithm less robust.

3.2.2 The Bounties Keep Going Up

Something like Preston's visit to the Mayor's office happened in the history of intellectual property. There are several possible events, so I'll skim through the list.

In 1710, the Statute of Anne was passed by the British government. It was the first copyright law in human history. And it rewarded authors with exclusive rights to copy and print their work for twenty-one years.

In 1790, Congress passed the first copyright law in America. The Copyright Act of 1790 granted Authors the right to print and publish their work for 14 years and to renew for another 14 years.

In 1831, Congress extends the term of Copyright to 28 years plus an additional 14 year extension, claiming it matches the protections provided to Authors in Europe.

In the 1880's, Victor Hugo, author of Les Miserables, paid a visit to some government official's office, and pushed for the Berne Convention. The Berne Convention was a treaty between a number of European countries that agreed to recognize copyright protections from member countries. Without such a treaty, copyright was only a national law, and a work would be under copyright only in the country where the author lived. The work would be public domain everywhere else.

In 1905, the Berlin Act modifies the Berne Convention to extend the Term of Copyright to the life of the Author plus 50 years.

In 1909, Congress passed the Revision of U.S. Copyright Act, and the term of Copyright is changed to be 28 years plus an additional 28 year extension.

In 1911, the United States entered the Buenos Aires Convention on Literary and Artistic Copyrights. This is the first international treaty the U.S. signs. The Buenos Aires treaty required all works protected by the treaty to contain a notice proclaiming "All Rights Reserved". (note that this is different than "copyright notice" which would be something like "Copyright 2004 Greg London").

In 1928, the Rome Act modified the Berne Convention to recognize "moral" rights of Authors. An Author's "moral" rights included "attribution" (the Author must be given credit for their works) and "integrity" (the work cannot be modified in a way that might prejudice or harm the Author's reputation).

In 1952, the Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) was adopted at Geneva in 1952 by countries who were not part of the Berne Convention but wanted some sort of international copyright protection. Members included the United States, Latin America, the Soviet Union, and some developing countries.

In 1976, Congress passed the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976. This is a major revision to Copyright law in anticipation of the United States joining the Berne Convention. The Term of Copyright had been 28 + 28 and is changed to "life plus 50".

In 1988, the United States joined Berne Convention, meeting the requirements of the treaty with the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976. The Universal Copyright Convention of 1952 no longer applied to U.S. Copyright law. The Buenos Aires Treaty of 1911 was no longer applicable. The phrase "All Rights Reserved" was no longer required to secure copyright in the U.S.

In 1993, the European Union Directive on Harmonizing Term of Copyright was issued. The goal was to ensure that there was a single duration for copyright across the entire EU. The chosen term was that of Germany, which had the longest copyright term of any EU state, lasting 70 years after the death of the author. Unlike some other copyright term extension acts, this act restored copyright to works that had fallen into the public domain in their source countries.

In 1998, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) was passed in the United States and retroactively extended the duration of Copyright from "life plus 50 years" to "life plus 70 years". The main argument given in its favor was to keep up with the EU Directive on Harmonizing Term of Copyright of 1993.

3.2.3 An Immortal Mouse

The Isaac Prestons of the world keep visiting the Mayor's office, corporate money keeps flowing to politicians in the form of campaign donations, and copyright terms keep going up.

In 1928, Walt Disney put out a movie called “Steamboat Willie”, starring Mickey Mouse.

At the time, copyright terms lasted 28+28=56 years. This meant that the bounty would have been paid in 1928+56=1984. The Mickey Mouse in “Steamboat Willie” would have become public domain in 1984.

But in 1976, Congress changed copyright law in preparation for joining the Berne Convention and extended copyright terms to “life plus 50 years”. Since corporations never die, corporate copyrights were set at 70 years. This meant that the bounty for “Steamboat Willie” would keep getting paid until 1928+70 = 1998.

But in 1998, Congress passed the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA), extending terms to “life plus 70”. Copyright terms for corporations were extended from 70 to 90 years, meaning Walt Disney Incorporated will keep cashing in on its bounty until 1928+90=2018.

In 1995, the Lobbyist Disclosure Act of 1995 was passed, requiring lobbyists (with a narrow definition of "lobbying") to report income or expenditure figures. Americans could now find out how much it costs to buy their government. I mention this because this was passed 3 years before the CTEA was brought before Congress. And as a result of the Lobbyist Disclosure Act, Walt Disney Corporation reported 2.5 million dollars in political contributions for 1998.

Political contributions paid by Walt Disney Corporation around the time the Copyright Act of 1976 are not known and must be left to the imagination.

“I don't know, I can imagine a lot.” --Han Solo, Star Wars Episode 4, “A New Hope”

Our bounty hunter cake cutting algorithm has been hijacked. Congress, who sometimes refer to themselves as “representatives”, seems to have forgotten whom they represent. Congress acts as cake-cutter on behalf of the people, the citizens, the community. The Walt Disney Corporation is a bounty hunter. Congress is supposed to cut the cake as small as possible until someone takes the bounty. But what has happened is that Congress now represents corporate interests over the community. The cake-cutter has been bribed by the bounty hunter. The bounty hunter now selects the size of the bounty through the purchase of a number of politicians.

The bounty hunter gets to cut the cake and eat it too.

As of 2005, Walt Disney Corporation is cashing in on these bounties with revenues around 20 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. Copyright terms have been extended to the point of becoming a form of corporate welfare, paid for by people who have to pay for works that should have entered the public domain decades ago.

Congress extends copyright terms so works don't enter the Public Domain. The people have to continue paying corporations for works that should have become free. Corporations then skim some of that money and give it to Congress as campaign contributions. No one in this loop has ever been convicted of giving or taking kickbacks, but that doesn't mean the whole thing doesn't stink like Sam's Slaughterhouse on a hot summer day.

3.2.4 The Argument Against Life Plus N

The algorithm is to set the bounty just high enough to get one job done.

This means that a bounty hunter has to keep working to make a living.

The algorithm will settle on a price just high enough to pay for the time and energy and expenses to catch the bad guy plus make a small profit. Competition will drive the bounty down and prevent anyone from making a gross profit on any single bounty.

Successful bounty hunters should be able to make a living if they keep collecting bounties.

That is not the same as a bounty hunter making a living after collecting one bounty.

The bounty should pay for the time, energy, and expenses of the one job.

For writers, the term should be long enough to pay for the time, energy, and expenses of writing the one work that gets copyrighted. Successful writers should be able to make a living writing. But that is not the same as a writer living off of the money from a single book for their whole life.

Terms that last “life of the author plus N years” do not follow this algorithm. In fact, “Life plus N” terms have several logical flaws in them.

Say someone writes a book when they are 15 years old. And say the average lifespan is 70. The “Life plus 70” term currently in place would seem to indicate that it will take 125 years for the author to make back all the time and energy they put into the book. And if it doesn't take 125 years, then why pay so much bounty?

A person who writes a book at 15, spent at most 15 years writing the book, and gets a 125 year bounty. They get 125 years to pay back 15 years of work. But if someone spent their entire life writing a book, they invested 70 years before they published their work, but then they die the next day and their heirs only get 70 years to paid back for the work.

15 years of work ==> 125 years of pay

70 years of work ==> 70 years of pay.

That doesn't seem right.

The second logical flaw flaunts the conservation of energy. If it's true that an author needs more than their lifetime to pay for their time and expenses on a book, then that means that author is LOSING money while they are alive. They're putting so much time and energy into it that they won't break even until they are dead and their great grandchildren are in college.

If Isaac Preston spent a million dollars to catch Bad Bart, and Eureka paid a thousand dollar a year bounty for him, then it will be one thousand years before Isaac's heirs finally gets enough money to pay for Bart's capture.

No incentive system can be designed to take so long to pay back a bounty that the bounty hunter dies before he finally breaks even.

If it really takes that long to break even, then our incentive system will never work. Unless bounty hunters are all bringing in the bad guys out of charity. And the writers demanding a life-plus-70 bounty are not thinking about charity. If they were thinking of charity, there are plenty of ways they could give their work away for free.

The “life-plus-70” proponents aren't concerned with the work they put into their writing or whether or not they broke even on that writing. They're main concern seems to be summed up well with the phrase, “It's mine!”

Mainly, these authors are committing the logical fallacy called reification. They are relating to an abstract concept as if it were a physical thing. Intellectual works are abstract. They are not physical objects you can possess and control. Once someone reads “to be or not to be”, even if you wrote it, you cannot force them to remove that thought from their mind.

Copyright law is needed to give abstract intellectual works some semblance of property-like behavior. But the U.S. Constitution only allows Congress to pass copyright laws as a bounty for people who create works to promote progress. So, it only exists as an incentive system to create works, and then the works return to their natural, abstract, unencumbered-by-law, state.

Relating to an abstract idea as if it were physical property is a logical fallacy. Intellectual works are property only because the community agrees to treat it as property as a reward for the creator. Creators cannot start from the premise that intellectual works are like physical property they control completely without ignoring the fact that it only behaves that way because the community agrees to it as a bounty for the work.

3.2.5 Resetting the Bounties, The Ideal Goal

I would propose a copyright term of 42 years as the bounty for creators.

First and foremost, the cake cutting algorithm for bounties requires the bounty be set as low as possible to get the job done. This encourages competition, efficiency, and speed. The duration for copyright on a work should be just long enough to pay for the time and energy it took to write the work plus pay a profit.

42 years seems like it should be long enough for an author to sell his work and have a chance at making a profit. Taking a story and translating it into all the different media should be doable in 42 years, for example taking a novel and converting it into a movie, a TV show, a radio show, a cartoon, and of course toy merchandising, should be something that can be reasonably accomplished in 42 years. 42 years should also be long enough that some publisher would be willing to invest in a work while copyright protects it. Certainly, if terms were extremely short, say, 1 year, then most people would simply wait for the copyright to expire and get the work from the Public Domain. However, 42 years should be long enough that financial investment in the arts can succeed and profit.

As it happens, 42 years is the term that the United States had set for its Copyright from 1831 until 1909, or more specifically terms were set to 28 years plus the option to renew for another 14 years. For almost a century, artists and authors were willing to create and publish their work for a 42 year term or less.

Works written by Americans during this period include The Last of the Mohicans (1826), The Tell-Tale Heart (1843), Walden Pond (1847), The Scarlet Letter (1850), The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1851), Moby Dick (1851), Uncle Tom's Cabin (1852), Little Women (1868), The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (1876), The Prince and the Pauper (1882), An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge (1886), A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court (1889), The Red Badge of Courage (1895), The Fall of The House of Usher (1834), The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (1900), Heart of Darkness (1902), The Call of the Wild (1903).

American authors who were willing to write during this period when they would receive a 42 year term for their works included: Edgar Allen Poe, Louisa May Alcott, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Mark Twain, Herman Melville, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Joseph Conrad, Jack London, and Henry David Thoreau.

As it happens, some, such as Mark Twain, advocated for longer copyright terms. But what is important to note is not what Mark Twain wanted to get paid for his work, but what Mark Twain was willing to get paid for his work. It may also be of interest to note that Mark Twain made a lot of money off of a 42 year copyright term, but his arguments for a Life-Plus-50 term show that he committed the fallacy of reification, of relating to the abstract labor of a writer as if it were a physical thing. In a speech to congress, Twain compares an Author's Copyright to Land or Real Estate owned by the Author.

“I am quite unable to guess why there should be a limit at all to the possession of the product of a man's labor. There is no limit to real estate. ... Doctor Hale has suggested that a man might just as well, after discovering a coal-mine and working it forty-two years, have the Government step in and take it away.”

Twain starts with the physical metaphor of someone discovering coal on their property, and ignores the fact that the thing created by a writer is not physical coal but abstract labor. To correct Twain's metaphor, the author does not own the land. They are rewarded for their labor of digging out the coal. In the same speech, Twain argues for copyright terms that last for “Perpetuity”. You can read Twain's speech here:

http://www.bpmlegal.com/cotwain.html

So, it seems that the current arguments used by Disney and the likes are not new. They are old arguments. And they are wrong arguments. And they are wrong because they consistently use misleading metaphors that start with some physical object and end up equating the last payment of copyright, the moment at which the work enters the Public Domain, with physical theft. Start with a bad metaphor that equates a writer's labor with a physical thing, and you end up with bad copyright law. Start off with metaphors that equate a writer's labor with some other labor or service, and you may end up with some sort of Fair copyright laws.

On the other hand, given what Twain himself was willing to write for, given that the man who argued for a Life-Plus-50 term was not only willing to write for a 42 year term, but also managed to make a lot of money doing it, it seems that 42 years has shown itself to be a long enough term that authors can be more than compensated for their efforts. History shows America had a century where the copyright Bounty was set to 42 years and authors were willing and able to successfully collect, to make a living at it, to thrive at it.

There will be current writers out there who will complain about shortening terms to 42 years. Some will fight it.

But the question for the community is simple: who should be setting the bounty?

Hopefully the community realizes that the community should be setting the bounty, not the bounty hunters. The algorithm is to set the bounty as low as possible but just high enough to get the job done. The algorithm does not say set the bounty so high that Walt Disney Corporation makes 20 billion dollars a year in revenue.

If the term is set to 42 years and novels still get written, movies still get created, and TV shows still get produced, then why pay a higher bounty? Mark Twain was willing to write for a 42 year term, and made an extremely good career doing so. The point is not what the authors want for their writings but what they are willing to write for.

Footnote regarding Twain: Twain spoke before Congress in 1906 for Life-Plus-50 copyright terms because Europe had just started Life-Plus-50 terms during his lifetime in 1880. Congress responded in 1909 by extending terms from 28+14 to 28+28. America didn't succumb to the Life-Plus-50 term until 1976, when Disney's Mickey Mouse was getting close to entering the Public Domain and Bruce Lehman was principal legal adviser to the U.S. House of Representatives committee that drafted the 1976 Copyright Act. Then when Mickey Mouse was about to enter the public domain again in 1998, Bruce Lehman was the Patent Commissioner and pushed for the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, extending copyright terms ANOTHER 20 years. Which is what you would expect to happen when the bounty hunters are in control of setting the bounties.

3.2.6 And if 42 isn't the answer, how about 56?

If the number of authors and new works created up until 1909 is not enough to convince you, then perhaps the number of authors and works up until 1976 will. From 1909 until 1976, copyright terms were set to 56 years or 28 years + 28