5 ms·

Again, the world where our main priority is assuring 'compensation' and 'rights' for our 'content' is the same one where rent-seeking assholes exploit artists.

Again, the world where our main priority is assuring 'compensation' and 'rights' for our 'content' is the same one where rent-seeking assholes exploit artists. Steve Miller's rant was only yesterday. The harder we let corporations ossify the notion that all knowledge should be owned and paid for every time it is used, the more we will suffer. Finally, you can't steal what is given away free. It's time for a paradigm shift, humanity. Slay this dragon.

kayoone 11y ago
Not a native speaker so i might not get the point, but most if this content is free anyway but the creators are getting robbed from views an increasing their own reach while others directly benefit from that. So many dubious facebook "celebrities" that use this to extend their audience which they can then sell ads to, it is really sickening.
- astazangasta 11y ago
  To be clear: to hell with 'views' and attaching ad revenue to art.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- dreamdu5t 11y ago
  They aren't robbed of views - they didn't have those views in the first place and didn't create them - the freebooter did
Agustus 11y ago
In the knowledge business world, the ability to do something requires a huge amount of capital to just get an initial product out the door. For a photographer to take an amazing photo of Zion National Park, they have travel, equipment, and time expenses. In this case, how does the photographer get compensated for all of this if some celeb or background site takes the photo and writes on it: "My home on the range." The huge back-end that is required to make something is the unseen portion of the economy, there should be a rights warehouse making it easy to put things on and declare usage fees. *Edit: their to there, because I is grammatically correct.
- astazangasta 11y ago
  I pretty much want to eradicate the knowledge business world. If the world-trotting celeb photographer goes extinct, so be it. I guarantee we will not lack for gorgeous photos of the world.
  - dreamdu5t 11y ago
    Just imagine if we had the computing power to start randomly generating images for every pixel combination. You could copyright every image possible before the photo was taken
    - esailija 11y ago
      Even for very small color space (e.g. 8-bit or 256 colors) and very small pictures (e.g. 32x32) the amount of possible images is for all intents and purposes infinite.
- krapp 11y ago
  The moment that photograph becomes digital, it's worthless. Equipment, travel, time, none of that matters when the end result is an arbitrary configuration of bits which can be copied perfectly, ad infinitum. This truth applies to anything in a digital format. All of the books, movies, games, documents, video clips, photographs - all of it is worthless, and no one deserves compensation for any of it, regardless of the effort that went into making it. The photographer would need to be be compensated for their time and effort beforehand, if at all, but the age when one can expect to be paid for content or knowledge seems to be rapidly coming to an end. "Freebooting" is only a problem because we've tried to make ownership and copyright work in a medium that renders them irrelevant, but really it's just the web working as intended. Like a lot of people here, I benefit personally from being able to assert ownership over digital content, but I can also see the writing on the wall.
CaptSpify 11y ago
Disclaimer: my own blog - https://blog.thekyel.com/?anchor=piracy https://blog.thekyel.com/?anchor=piracy "..we are now seeing the effects of free and immediate duplication of a product. And, sadly, we have been caught with our pants down."
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

kayoone 11y ago

Not a native speaker so i might not get the point, but most if this content is free anyway but the creators are getting robbed from views an increasing their own reach while others directly benefit from that. So many dubious facebook "celebrities" that use this to extend their audience which they can then sell ads to, it is really sickening.

astazangasta 11y ago
To be clear: to hell with 'views' and attaching ad revenue to art.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
dreamdu5t 11y ago
They aren't robbed of views - they didn't have those views in the first place and didn't create them - the freebooter did

Agustus 11y ago

In the knowledge business world, the ability to do something requires a huge amount of capital to just get an initial product out the door. For a photographer to take an amazing photo of Zion National Park, they have travel, equipment, and time expenses. In this case, how does the photographer get compensated for all of this if some celeb or background site takes the photo and writes on it: "My home on the range." The huge back-end that is required to make something is the unseen portion of the economy, there should be a rights warehouse making it easy to put things on and declare usage fees. *Edit: their to there, because I is grammatically correct.

astazangasta 11y ago
I pretty much want to eradicate the knowledge business world. If the world-trotting celeb photographer goes extinct, so be it. I guarantee we will not lack for gorgeous photos of the world.
- dreamdu5t 11y ago
  Just imagine if we had the computing power to start randomly generating images for every pixel combination. You could copyright every image possible before the photo was taken
  - esailija 11y ago
    Even for very small color space (e.g. 8-bit or 256 colors) and very small pictures (e.g. 32x32) the amount of possible images is for all intents and purposes infinite.
krapp 11y ago
The moment that photograph becomes digital, it's worthless. Equipment, travel, time, none of that matters when the end result is an arbitrary configuration of bits which can be copied perfectly, ad infinitum. This truth applies to anything in a digital format. All of the books, movies, games, documents, video clips, photographs - all of it is worthless, and no one deserves compensation for any of it, regardless of the effort that went into making it. The photographer would need to be be compensated for their time and effort beforehand, if at all, but the age when one can expect to be paid for content or knowledge seems to be rapidly coming to an end. "Freebooting" is only a problem because we've tried to make ownership and copyright work in a medium that renders them irrelevant, but really it's just the web working as intended. Like a lot of people here, I benefit personally from being able to assert ownership over digital content, but I can also see the writing on the wall.

CaptSpify 11y ago

Disclaimer: my own blog - https://blog.thekyel.com/?anchor=piracy https://blog.thekyel.com/?anchor=piracy "..we are now seeing the effects of free and immediate duplication of a product. And, sadly, we have been caught with our pants down."

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]