The customers enjoy the products in a non-rival way, but when the same product is allowed to be produced at a low marginal cost, the author may not be given any incentives for the work created. It is assumed that by doing this and reducing the registration of copyright laws, the quantity and quality of such products will fall down drastically below the socially desirable level and will probably make the market less competitive compared to others. This can be a self-destructive force which slowly degrades the market leading to chaos. This is one of the strong assumptions of those who believe that copyright laws will be beneficial for the market. This attempt of introducing copyright law is to strike a balance between short term instant gratification obtained by purchasing a product and the consistent and long term satisfaction for using a quality product. This is done by providing economic incentives for the creators which fosters a culture that is dynamic, competitive, creative, and forward-looking and progressing.
Providing economic profits to the creator has been seen as a way of promoting duplication of such habits of creating works of quality which can enjoy a prestigious position for a substantial period in the market. To what extent is this assumption successful is the real test of this assumption, as any deviation from the motive of the law will be a strict violation of the law and also ruin the credibility of the creator. It is again seen that creators and inventors will and may not be active as much as they should if their work is not given intellectual property rights. Now this assumption is strange because even before the introduction and formation of such kind of protectionist measures of copyright law, there were products being invented and created and marketed freely. With subsequent growth of the market, there came a desire of creators against unauthorised use of the product and competition in the same product category. The copyright law got introduced with incentives to be provided to the creators who would feel protected for a long term period and there will be no unauthorised use of the product.
The idea of providing incentives is something which is an encouragement fee for enhancing the creations quality and quantity in each sector, but when capitalistic market forces act with such laws, the pure intent of the law is not achieved. In a capitalistic market, where self-interest is the basis of all actions, any company having copyright law with it such as printing, authorship, and any industrial designs, it will become difficult for the company to resist or compete the market forces against the company’s objectives. Moreover, in books, there is an element of discriminative prices such as paperback and hardback which enables the publisher to earn more profits. The cost of making a book is one cost and the author’s expression is another cost which makes the publisher reprint copies of a book. Apart from economic rationale which is merely attempting to encourage more such inventions, the rationale is also rights based, as anyone having the right on their own body would have the right on any of their creation. This basis is the human right foundation enabling everyone to be the rightful owner of their own creation, irrespective of the future utility of the work in the market. If considered through such an approach, every new invention would be eligible for getting a copyright for a certain period of time. However, it is to be seen whether the item produced is of general benefit to society and does society accepts it as a copyrighted material. This is difficult to explain as every individual has varied perceptions about the use of copyrighted materials. Thus, it becomes difficult to assume that all copyright materials will be beneficial to society and will be accepted easily by everyone.