[teamonkey]

The fact that it worked for one movie does not mean that it would work any other movie.

The hook with Avatar was that it was a spectacle deliberately designed to be seen in 3D on the biggest screen possible, to the extent that there's very little point not seeing it in a movie theatre.

It's a unique example and its impact (and profitability) would be lessened by a) competition by similar movies and b) greater adoption of home 3D hardware.

[steveklabnik]

Absolutely. There's no question that without IP, things would be different. The real question is if it would be a better or worse world.

[alanh]

In my mind, the answer is “better” if we also no longer need to worry about money (that is, a post-capitalist system). I’m not sure about the meantime.

[steveklabnik]

The book that I cited up there in my huge post actually lays out a pretty compelling argument that it even works within capitalism.

IP is a pretty new concept. Things have worked really well for a long time without it.

[teamonkey]

Yes, capitalism is a pretty new concept also. The two go hand-in-hand.

But never before in history have we been able to copy media ad infinitum for practically zero time, cost and effort. It's always required time, an educated, talented person to copy, or resources that had a real cost.

In the case of the 3D printer the only real expense is the plastic used to print the object, which is awesome only for those who manufacture the materials.

[steveklabnik]

Actually, it's pretty funny: the materials are the only place where they make their money. 3D printers are sold on a total razor and blade model, the machine manufacturers make 70% of their money from materials, and something like 5% on actual machines.

Then things like this happen: http://open3dp.me.washington.edu/2009/10/sugar-sugar-powder/

> The cost of this mix is $0.15 – $0.30 per pound!