5 ms·
That was a good read. I'd be interested to see the author address trademarks and branding, because that's where you find the intersection of identity (rivalrous
by rogual 10y ago
That was a good read. I'd be interested to see the author address trademarks and branding, because that's where you find the intersection of identity (rivalrous in her thesis) and the creative arts (non-rivalrous).
The author states that cultural works increase in value the more they are shared. At the risk of debating semantics ("shared", "value") — would Disney still be a $50B company if anyone had been allowed to release a Mickey Mouse cartoon?
- pbhjpbhj 10y agoMickey Mouse is a trademark too, so once out of copyright one could release a cartoon featuring the character but not a "Mickey Mouse cartoon" per se. It's not clear to me if you could even call the mouse Mickey and avoid infringing the trademark.
- dnautics 10y agoI'm not sure about that. Once out of copyright you couldn't release a cartoon featuring the character (as that's a trademark), but you could make copies of steamboat willie and freely distribute the content over the internet (or VHS).
- dnautics 10y agoI don't know about nina, but I personally see trademark as the only "valid" one of the three forms of IP (precisely because of rivalrousness). On the other hand, there are always things which challenge me: David Tran does not trademark Sriracha.