4 ms·

> Would GRRM still be writing ASOIF if he wasn't able to make a living off it? Perhaps, perhaps not. Paying him makes it a lot more likely. But copyright and D

• falcolas 10y ago
  > But copyright [...] is about forcing people to pay Which, in my opinion, is not an unreasonable thing. If you want to consume the content, you pay the content creator in their currency of choice (be it github stars, their name immortalized in an attribution clause, or cash).
  • wolfgke 10y ago
    > If you want to consume the content, you pay the content creator in their currency of choice (be it github stars, their name immortalized in an attribution clause, or cash). I consider doing this as a gesture of politeness, but nothing that should be enforced by violence.
    • falcolas 10y ago
      > I consider doing this as a gesture of politeness I disagree. The rights of a content creator are, after all, enshrined in the constitution. That's a bit more than "being polite". That said, the right of the public to have access after a defined period of time is also enshrined, so that does need to be taken into account. > nothing that should be enforced by violence Thats quite the jump - violence? I'm going to make the assumption that you're referring to the idea that no law should be made that you aren't willing to resort to violence to support. Even under that assumption, I am OK with this being the law of the land. I believe that a person has the right to demand compensation for access their work, regardless of the form that work takes.
      • syshum 10y ago
        >> I'm going to make the assumption that you're referring to the idea that no law should be made that you aren't willing to resort to violence to support. All laws are enforced by violence, that is what makes them law. Law is force, Force is violence. Every law, from Jay Walking, to First Degree Murder is based by the threat that an armed agent from the government will enforce that rule upon you.
        • falcolas 10y ago
          > Law is force Not really - a law is a codification of desired human behavior. > an armed agent from the government will enforce that rule upon you. This is definitely at the extreme end of the list of possibilities. The enforcement of those laws can take any number of forms, but most do not involve armed agents. Most involve certified letters and negotiations between lawyers in front of an (unarmed) judge. This is especially true when we're discussing copyright (with the occasional exception proving the rule). Even speeding tickets are handled more and more frequently by mail. Armed agents are typically reserved for cases where harm to either a body or a property are possible.
          • pessimizer 10y ago
            > Not really - a law is a codification of desired human behavior. No, that's a standard. > This is definitely at the extreme end of the list of possibilities. No, it's in the middle of the inevitable steps of escalation. A speeding ticket becomes an armed agent hitting you with a stick and jail time if you wait long enough. As does a court judgment over an illegally downloaded song.
            • falcolas 10y ago
              > becomes an armed agent hitting you with a stick and jail time if you wait long enough At which point you've broken a separate law, and have been held in contempt of court. Ditto the copyright infringement example. If you break the law, and then willfully break the law again, you can't expect to be treated with leniency.
  • EdHominem 10y ago
    But I don't care about your silly movie and I'm still forced to pay for the enforcement arm of the law, the courts, etc, that you use to prop up your government granted monopoly. And even with all that, we don't guarantee you an income, we only offer you help hurting people who don't pay you. You can still go broke and nobody cares, which I think shows that it's not about helping creators or rewarding hard work.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]