Sökformulär

That's an interesting objection, but I think it's flawed. The main motivation behind people putting money into Flattr or voluntary mp3 subscriptions or T-shirts is not a sense that "I should pay for what I consume somehow", but rather a sense that they like this artist and want to contribute.

If people were searching for an excuse not to pay, they could already find it in the much larger amounts of tax money already channeled into the cultural economy through free educations, institutions and so on. Few people do!

Maybe my main point would be that it's new economic models we need, not necessarily new "business" models. The point is ensuring good production conditions. If we can find solutions that let filmmakers concentrate on production and not distribution or marketing, that would be great. Is it important in itself whether the solutions we come up with could be considered "business"?

I'd say it isn't. It is important, however, that they don't give neither corporations or the state too much of a say on where the money goes. That would be my main objection to several possible economic models, including "planned" ones.

The planned part of the libraries is extremely limited (consisting mainly of librarians having a say about what qualifies for inclusion). It's comparable to the lowered sales tax on book we enacted in Sweden some years ago. By your definition, the book market in Sweden would be a planned economy today, and I don't think that's a very useful way of using the term :)