Digital replicators
In general I define replicators as information, ideas, or an item
of intellectual property that can be copied or can be considered
to reproduced. Digital replicators are the same ideas or information
but produced in a digital form that can be distributed over the
Internet or some other medium. I only make the distinction because
this paper discusses issues centred on the digital manifestation
of replicators. Examples are well known: CDs DVDs, MP3 files, text
files, software.
Although centred on the Internet I extend the idea of the digital
environment to include digital products however they are distributed,
this includes such items as CDs and DVDs. Human information producers
and users are also considered to be part of this extended environment.
Richard Dawkins has established three properties
that can be used to define a replicator: Fecundity, Copying-Fidelity,
and Longevity. A replicator that is successful in all three of these
areas will be a very successful replicator and will spread far and
wide. Conversely, a replicator that has weak properties will be
a poor replicator.
For this analysis I use these three properties as coefficients
in an equation that predicts a replicators success at reproducing
and therefore its success at spreading throughout the environment.
Replicator success quotient = Fecundity
* Fidelity * Longevity
Each coefficient is given a value of zero to one
based on the replicators performance in that area and the result
will predict the replicators success. (Zero will mean total failure
through to one predicting great success).
For example a replicator that always copies itself with so many
errors that it is unrecognisable will have a fidelity score near
zero and will not get far as a replicator. Equally, a replicator
locked in a file with an unknown key will have near zero fecundity
and will not spread.
For the Digital replicators mentioned above and
a few others for comparison I have estimated values for the three
coefficients and produced the table below.
|
Medium vs replicator coefficient
|
Fecundity
|
Fidelity
|
Longevity
|
Replicator value
|
|
Vinyl record
|
0.5
|
0.7
|
0.4
|
0.14
|
|
Cassette tape
|
0.9
|
0.7
|
0.3
|
0.189
|
|
CD
|
0.45
|
0.95
|
0.9
|
0.385
|
|
MP3 file
|
0.95
|
0.9
|
0.8
|
0.684
|
|
Music + SDMI
|
0.5
|
0.95
|
0.9
|
0.428
|
|
MP3 file + new PRD
|
0.7
|
0.95
|
0.95
|
0.632
|
The coefficient values are somewhat arbitrary
but I believe give a good and interesting indication of the predicted
success, as a replicator, of each of the media.
Considering the vinyl record (replicator value
0.14): Its fecundity is rated at 0.5 because of the specialised
equipment required to produce a record. Its fidelity is rated good
at 0.7 when you consider the music quality when a new record is
played on a high fidelity system but its longevity is rated poorly
at 0.4 because vinyl records can wear quickly and can easily be
irreparably damaged.
Looking at the coefficients for the raw MP3 file:
Its fecundity on the Internet is very high at 0.95 because of its
relatively small compressed size and the ease of its practically
free distribution. Being digital, its copying fidelity is good (0.9)
and its small digital size makes long term storage feasible once
it has been copied (0.8). This gives it an overall replicator value
of 0.684.
Now look at the coefficients of the new MP3 file
with PRD
field supported by the distributed rights environment: Its fecundity
value (0.7) drops in comparison with the raw MP3 file (0.95) because
of higher distribution costs in the rights environment (note that
I estimate these costs are still less than obtaining a physical
CD (0.45)). Its fidelity is improved (0.95) because many copies
are made from a master file and its longevity is ensured (0.95)
because any lost files can be replaced from the master through the
licence system.
A file that degrades or is inhibited after it
has been copied once such as in the SDMI
environment will have a much reduced fecundity (0.5) and therefore
is a less successful replicator than some of the other formats.
(This is obviously the aim of the SDMI
and shows that it will reduce the number of file copies but I will
argue later that this is not the desired result.)
The following table goes on to expand this analysis
over a slightly wider field.
|
Medium vs replicator coefficient
|
Fecundity
|
Fidelity
|
Longevity
|
Replicator value
|
|
Spoken story
|
0.3
|
0.4
|
0.3
|
0.036
|
|
Books
|
0.6
|
0.8
|
0.8
|
0.384
|
|
E-books
|
0.95
|
0.75
|
0.95
|
0.677
|
|
Film cinema
|
0.4
|
0.9
|
0.3
|
0.108
|
|
Film broadcast
|
0.85
|
0.8
|
0.4
|
0.272
|
|
DVD
|
0.45
|
0.95
|
0.9
|
0.385
|
|
Digital video on demand *
|
0.9
|
0.9
|
0.75
|
0.607
|
|
Digital video on demand + PRD
*
|
0.75
|
0.95
|
0.95
|
0.677
|
* Assuming sufficient bandwidth is available in
the future.
First off, if you look at the comparison of vinyl
records (0.14), cassette tapes (0.189), and CD's (0.385) it shows
why CD's have become successful and vinyl records almost obsolete
despite the higher costs involved in producing CD's (more complicated
technology and new equipment required). Following that it shows
why the current rage in MP3 file (0.684) swapping is more successful.
It also emphasises the advantage digital replicators have over the
analogue equivalents and so demonstrates why the digital environment
is going to be 'the future'.
The first table shows that the new MP3 file format
with PRD fields added and supported
by rights and licence offices has a similar replicator value to
raw MP3 files. You might wonder what is the benefit of introducing
the new complicated DIRP system. The significant point is that at least
50% of music in the MP3 format would 'prefer' to take the new system
route, where the product and owner of the product will be identified.
The second point, I would argue, is that as the new system becomes
established its fecundity will improve (costs come down) and so
will overtake raw MP3 files as the preferred route. In the same
way, any environmental pressure that promotes MP3+PRD reproduction
over raw MP3 files, either moral, legal or technical, would further
swing the balance in favour of new MP3's plus PRD's.
Regarding the second table: Assuming portable
reader technology improves, E-books (digital text) will become very
successful replicators and more so if producers were protected in
the new digital rights system. Digital video on demand has the same
promising future and, again, I would argue that if the rights system
were in place the identified version would far out perform the raw
version partly because the costs of local long term storage will
be that much greater.
In the table below I introduce a further coefficient,
the desirability coefficient, that includes a cost factor to obtaining
the product. I consider the product to be a music file distributed
in three formats, CD, SDMI protected
product, and MP3+PRD,
and for each format I compare its distribution against a 'free'
MP3 file containing the same music. The desirability coefficient
of 0.1 is arrived at by assuming 10% of the population who liked
that particular piece of music would pay a reasonable cost to be
able own and play the file and always have a perfect copy available
should they loose their copy.
|
Products
|
Replicator coefficient
|
Desirability coefficient
(cost)
|
Distribution coefficient
|
Distribution %
|
|
CD
|
0.385
|
0.1
|
0.0385
|
5.63%
|
|
MP3
|
0.684
|
1.0
|
0.684
|
94.37%
|
|
SDMI
|
0.428
|
0.1
|
0.0428
|
6.26%
|
|
MP3
|
0.684
|
1.0
|
0.684
|
93.74%
|
|
MP3+PRD
|
0.632
|
0.1
|
0.0632
|
9.24%
|
|
MP3
|
0.684
|
1.0
|
0.684
|
90.76%
|
Note the predicted increase of sales of the PRD
protected product over the other formats under the same market conditions.
Assuming the costs of the electronic MP3+PRD product are less than
any physically distributed intellectual products, such as CD's,
then the purchase cost could be reduced and you could expect even
more sales in the same market. Also, under the Distributed Intellectual
Property Rights system, most of the MP3 files shown in the last
line of the table would in fact include a PRD
and so a least the product would be identified and the creator known
even if it was not a purchased product.
If you were to perform this analysis on other
products which contain information which might be updated regularly
or software which is revised or improved regularly the desirability
coefficient could be much higher and the PRD
identified product would proportionally gain more of an advantage
over a non-identified product.
|