In
our book Michele and I point out how most modern IP law arose not from a problem that there was too little innovation and creation that needed to be solved, but rather that in a mature industry, aging firms no longer willing to compete in the market successfully lobbied government for protection from competition in the form of IP laws. Once again...
the New York Times reports
Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, talked about a bill proposing to extend copyright protection to fashion that had been introduced in the Senate last week, mirroring one that has been under consideration in the House since April 2006.
As has been well documented - for example by Raustiala and Sprigman - there is both rampant piracy and rampant innovation in the fasion industry. There is no problem here for goverment to fix. There are firms that would like a monopoly so they can earn more money. Wouldn't we all like that?
You can find some further blog discussion by Sam Boyd and the invaluable Matt Yglesias.
Ah, Sen. Schumer--the Senator from 7th Avenue. Congressman Nadler also represents the fashion district, among other parts of New York.
No rent seeking there by politicos and fashionistas.
By ignoring the outstanding article by Sprigman and Raustiala against the copyright position in fashion goods (although the NYT did cover it earlier), the Gray Lady doesn't cover herself in glory.
I haven't read the read the work of fashion historian Valerie Steele , who teaches at the Fashion Institute of Technology. I wonder what her position on copyright in fashion goods is?
And yes I would like a monopoly, thank you. Ka-ching!
