Page:Culture.vs.Copyright 01.pdf/90

Beta: Yes, it does. But this will not take money from my business.
Alpha: Really? It will take some customers from you. Is this not the same?
Teacher: I see a difference between the two methods. In the case of royalties, we have to set up and enforce some artificial measurements to take money from Beta’s business. This becomes specifically questionable. If Beta gets no profits, his business may die, and Alpha will get no royalties at all.
Alpha: In that case, I got rid of a competitor, and that is good.
Kappa: For you probably. Not for the public.
Delta: I doubt whether is always beneficial for Alpha.
Alpha: And why is that?
Teacher: May I finish?
Alpha, Delta, Kappa: Sorry.
Teacher: So, in the case of attribution, when Beta just honestly reveals whom he learned the recipe from, he does not necessarily lose. He can even gain.
Alpha: And how is that? Sorry.
Teacher: That’s OK. When Beta tells who taught him the recipe, he appeals to people’s feelings. Some of his customers would certainly be curious to go to Alpha’s place, and some would admire the tribute as such. Both businesses achieve more solid relations with their patrons and public in general.
Kappa: By the way, Alpha can also tell who learned from him.
Alpha: Aha, sure.
Delta: Why not? This certainly adds credibility to your business.
Gamma: Two times, by the way. Firstly, it implies that the recipe is worthy because it gets followers. Secondly, if you’re not afraid of a competitor, you make your customers feel your business is strong.
Kappa: I like this! A shared recipe benefits everybody, even when attribution is given!
Beta: Because attribution is given! Not “even when” but “because”!
This is how things differ in culture and civilization! If Alpha wants my money, we both lose! When we share ideas, we both win! This is how it works! This is how they are different! I never expected it to turn out this way! This is terrific!
Gamma: Wow! I’ve never seen Beta so excited!