12-08-2009, 07:23 AM | #31 | |
Member Retired
Posts: 274
Karma: 4446
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Device: PRS-350-SC: Sony Reader Pocket Edition
|
Quote:
|
|
12-08-2009, 07:25 AM | #32 | |
Icanhasdonuts?
Posts: 2,837
Karma: 532407
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Mölnbo, Sweden
Device: Kobo Aura 2nd edition, Kobo Clara HD
|
Quote:
Now... DRM on the other hand |
|
Advert | |
|
12-08-2009, 07:53 AM | #33 | |
Addict
Posts: 229
Karma: 887
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Utah, USA
Device: iPad, iPhone 4
|
Quote:
I support a copyright system more like the patent system. Actually, I support a totally crazy unified IP system but that's a heated discussion for another day. |
|
12-08-2009, 08:46 AM | #34 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,355
Karma: 35112572
Join Date: Jan 2008
Device: Pocketbook
|
Quote:
Hmmm. what is relevant? Copyright is dying. It was born from technology. it is dying from technology. My first post here (which I've forgotten how to find to link to) was a long description about this. This may be a bad thing or a good thing, but regardless, it is an is thing. As far as "hatred for Corporations". Let's be precise. It's hatred for unethical corporations. What do I find unethical in corporations? Unwillingness to follow contracts, as written and agreed to. Suborning the political process through bribery (and I draw no distinction between quid pro quo legally defined bribery, and quid pro defacto which is providing goods, services, and money to help a politician get elected or re-elected - they're both bribery to my worldview). When a piece of I.P. was created for a corporation, it was done under legal "rules of engagement", i.e. what copyright was at the time. When corporations lobby for extension for sunk expenses, in order to continue to profit from I.P. that should go into the public domain, that's being unethical. It is stealing from the public, if you will. In the US, if the rule of contract was enforced, everything before 1954 would be public domain. Instead, only one years worth of I.P. has gone into the public domain in the last 40 years, with the major I.P. players working the world (bribing all the way) over to get longer terms, over and over again. Totally unethical. To the lawsuit at hand. If the corporations wanted to "make examples of people", destroying economic lives in order to protect their monopolies, well, they should be subject to the same Draconian law they espouse. If this bankrupts them, that is justice, as they themselves espoused. That isn't "bashing corporations" that is seeing justice prevail. Last edited by Greg Anos; 12-08-2009 at 08:50 AM. |
|
12-08-2009, 09:20 AM | #35 | |
Guru
Posts: 820
Karma: 11012
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Device: Bookeen Cybook
|
Quote:
However, I'm not sure that in the age of Internet copyright is neccessary anymore, and whether it still encourages creativity more than it stifles it. |
|
Advert | |
|
12-08-2009, 09:47 AM | #36 | |
Banned
Posts: 5,100
Karma: 72193
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South of the Border
Device: Coffin
|
Quote:
The sooner we see it die, the better. |
|
12-08-2009, 10:09 AM | #37 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 5,185
Karma: 25133758
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3 (Past: Kobo Mini, PEZ, PRS-505, Clié)
|
Copyright is necessary *to keep corporations from ripping off creators.* Not to keep the public/consumers from sharing works.
Copyright prevents Disney from grabbing the newest independent film and releasing it in theatres of their choice, for their profit. Copyright prevents Random House from grabbing MoeJoe's stories from feedbooks and publishing them. (And from collecting MobileRead discussion threads into a book and selling it.) Copyright prevents EMI from grabbing some garage band's new, trendy sound, pressing some CDs, & selling 10,000 copies without telling the band. (Or, well, it's supposed to, "pending list" notwithstanding.) The reason copyright infringement's penalties are so ridiculously huge is that they're aimed at companies, not individuals. Copyright was never intended to prevent a person from writing down the lyrics to a song she likes, and sending them in a letter to a friend. Changing the tech for that from "ink and paper" to "my blog post" doesn't change the utter lunacy of attempting to prosecute individuals for non-commercial use of IP. The reason we're so gleeful about these record companies being targeted by copyright law, is that this is what the law is supposed to do. There isn't any defense, here, of "I'm not costing the artist anything" or "I'm not doing this for personal gain" or "I was just sharing what I love with my friends." What these record companies are doing--sell stuff now, pay artists "when we get around to it," or never--is *exactly* what copyright law was created to prevent. |
12-08-2009, 10:21 AM | #38 | |
"Assume a can opener..."
Posts: 755
Karma: 1942109
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Local Cluster
Device: iLiad v2, DR1000
|
I've said it a few times in other threads, but I'll say it here too: James Boyle wrote a book in 2008, which he published under a CC licence, called Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind, description here (excerpt):
Quote:
Anyway, it's definitely worth reading. |
|
12-08-2009, 10:26 AM | #39 | |
Sir Penguin of Edinburgh
Posts: 12,375
Karma: 23555235
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: DC Metro area
Device: Shake a stick plus 1
|
Quote:
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...881#post133881 |
|
12-08-2009, 11:46 AM | #40 | |
Professional Contrarian
Posts: 2,045
Karma: 3289631
Join Date: Mar 2009
Device: Kindle 4 No Touchie
|
Quote:
Part of the problem is that you are assuming that every content creator is in the same situation as you, and shares your mindset. I don't know your specific situation, but let's assume based on your comments that we are talking about a lone individual who is either self-published, or working with a small publisher that does not have extensive financial resources. On one hand, it's unlikely that you could stop people distributing your works via P2P, at least not without enraging a few techno-libertarians. It's also unlikely that if another artist plagiarizes your work, and that artist does not have much success, you would bother to do much more than send them a nasty letter. However, let's say you copyright and self-publish a book, and 18 months later there's a big-budget Hollywood movie that used your book's plot ideas, character names, even specific dialog. I'm going to guess that somehow or another, you will come up with the resources to demand your due. Similarly, I used to work with a lot of photographers. Every once in awhile, a client would use an image without permission, or put the image into wider or more extensive use than they paid for. Photographers don't have huge bankrolls -- it's a pretty lean business for everyone except an elite top tier -- but they can still rely on copyright laws to protect their IP, and receive the payment that is their due for their work and its usage. (Many pro photographers are very protective of their IP, by the way.) Copyright doesn't just protect the Big Bad Corporations. As Elfwreck points out, it also protects the (small) content creators as well. Even if DRM falls by the wayside (which I view as possible but not terribly likely), copyright will be around for a long time. |
|
12-08-2009, 12:01 PM | #41 | |
"Assume a can opener..."
Posts: 755
Karma: 1942109
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Local Cluster
Device: iLiad v2, DR1000
|
Quote:
Like Doctorow said, those small indie writers are only going to benefit from increased notoriety (they can hardly earn less, in any case), and if they don't.. well. They should perhaps more care about the fact that they're being allowed to leave a legacy for future generations to remember them by? Yes, this is hardly a satisfactory answer, but imo copyright does far more bad than good, while it's not even proven that it works for 5% of the [known? good?] authors (mind you, I don't want to talk about revenues here, I'm talking about literary success). Anyway, read the book by Boyle. |
|
12-08-2009, 12:03 PM | #42 | |||
Professional Contrarian
Posts: 2,045
Karma: 3289631
Join Date: Mar 2009
Device: Kindle 4 No Touchie
|
Quote:
However I don't think copyright is going anywhere, nor should it (see above). DRM may or may not, but that's also a separate issue. I concur that one should chastise and/or punish unethical corporations. It gets a bit problematic though when your ethical standards make it all but impossible for any company to behave in a moral fashion. (There are also many people who do not even try to make any distinctions, and just loathe the mere idea of corporations and/or copyright.) Lobbying is far from a perfect system, but it is legal, and the desire to restrict it runs smack into our (yes, citizens' as well as organizations') legal right to participate in the electoral process. Quote:
Quote:
I also don't think that everything needs to go into public domain; it really doesn't bother me that you can't legally make a t-shirt that depicts Mickey Mouse smoking a spliff (unless you're doing so as a satire or parody, which iirc is a form of protected speech). Offhand I don't know how you could draw the line, especially without creating a huge loophole. Either way, I don't view this as anywhere near as egregious an offense as failing to (or choosing not to) pay royalties to an artist. |
|||
12-08-2009, 12:58 PM | #43 | |
Banned
Posts: 2,094
Karma: 2682
Join Date: Aug 2009
Device: N/A
|
Quote:
Last edited by DawnFalcon; 12-08-2009 at 01:05 PM. |
|
12-08-2009, 01:45 PM | #44 | ||||
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,355
Karma: 35112572
Join Date: Jan 2008
Device: Pocketbook
|
Quote:
Should corporations have the right to lobby? They don't have the right to vote. Perhaps we should restrict the right to lobby to individuals with the right to vote. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We founded this country on limited government because our founding fathers knew there was nothing more dangerous than an uncontrolled government. In I.P. we seem to have created one....And it's not even competitively priced. |
||||
12-08-2009, 03:09 PM | #45 | |
Complicated Warlock
Posts: 677
Karma: 160970
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Madiganistan
Device: HP Mini 1101, Droid X rooted, GTab rooted/VEGAnTAB Ginger Edition/CM7
|
Quote:
Even if lobbying rules were given some real teeth, there would be a fully-exploitable loophole somewhere, because those who craft the laws will benefit from it. What does this have to do with copyright abuse? Because in both cases it becomes a matter of "Who's policing the police?" |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The absolute n00b guide to installing applications | Adam B. | iRex | 90 | 08-30-2013 07:01 AM |
ePub not supported < div > position: absolute | samsgates | ePub | 1 | 06-18-2010 11:22 AM |
Absolute best eBook reader? | Xtt | Which one should I buy? | 46 | 04-22-2010 01:48 AM |
Whats the absolute BEST accessory you have for your 505? | svakanda | Sony Reader | 61 | 06-11-2009 11:45 AM |
In Copyright? - Copyright Renewal Database launched | Alexander Turcic | News | 26 | 07-09-2008 09:36 AM |