3 ms·

> perhaps if I can't follow or respect the creator's wishes in how to consume the content that he or she created in the manner it was created, maybe I shouldn't

by deogeo 8y ago

> perhaps if I can't follow or respect the creator's wishes in how to consume the content that he or she created in the manner it was created, maybe I shouldn't consume it at all? I strongly disagree. While I also think that creators should be compensated for their works (for a limited time), after they get said compensation, they should get no say in how you consume the content, or what you do with it (with the obvious exception of making it available to others).

rexpop 8y ago
> after they get said compensation, they should get no say in how you consume the content We need universal basic income alongside the abolition of intellectual property law.
- rocqua 8y ago
  One part of IP law that needs to remain is attribution. We don't want people copying others work and claiming they made it. Another part is trademark law. It should not be possible for e.g. coca cola to make Pepsi cans with horrible tasting drinks inside. However, most of Patent law, and a lot of Copyright law should be scrapped.
  - klez 8y ago
    > Another part is trademark law. It should not be possible for e.g. coca cola to make Pepsi cans with horrible tasting drinks inside. I'm pretty sure that falls more under fraud than it falls under trademark violation.
    - uiri 8y ago
      Trademark law functions as an extension of laws against fraud. It really doesn't have much to do with copyrights nor patents.
  - msla 8y ago
    > One part of IP law that needs to remain is attribution. We don't want people copying others work and claiming they made it. The social norm against plagiarism is plenty strong. It's so strong, in fact, plenty of people think copyright law prohibits it. https://waxy.org/2011/12/no_copyright_intended/ https://waxy.org/2011/12/no_copyright_intended/ > Another part is trademark law. It should not be possible for e.g. coca cola to make Pepsi cans with horrible tasting drinks inside. And this is why trademark law shouldn't have been swept up under the illusory banner of "Intellectual Property" to begin with: Rightfully considered, it's a consumer protection law, not a property law.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Yeah, sure. IP is getting increasingly ridiculous over time, turning into a framework of rent seeking and abuse. IP laws were meant to incentivize individuals to work for the benefit of the society - not to protect individual's abilities for getting passive income ad infinitum.

by deogeo 8y ago

rexpop 8y ago

> after they get said compensation, they should get no say in how you consume the content We need universal basic income alongside the abolition of intellectual property law.

rocqua 8y ago
One part of IP law that needs to remain is attribution. We don't want people copying others work and claiming they made it. Another part is trademark law. It should not be possible for e.g. coca cola to make Pepsi cans with horrible tasting drinks inside. However, most of Patent law, and a lot of Copyright law should be scrapped.
- klez 8y ago
  > Another part is trademark law. It should not be possible for e.g. coca cola to make Pepsi cans with horrible tasting drinks inside. I'm pretty sure that falls more under fraud than it falls under trademark violation.
  - uiri 8y ago
    Trademark law functions as an extension of laws against fraud. It really doesn't have much to do with copyrights nor patents.
- msla 8y ago
  > One part of IP law that needs to remain is attribution. We don't want people copying others work and claiming they made it. The social norm against plagiarism is plenty strong. It's so strong, in fact, plenty of people think copyright law prohibits it. https://waxy.org/2011/12/no_copyright_intended/ https://waxy.org/2011/12/no_copyright_intended/ > Another part is trademark law. It should not be possible for e.g. coca cola to make Pepsi cans with horrible tasting drinks inside. And this is why trademark law shouldn't have been swept up under the illusory banner of "Intellectual Property" to begin with: Rightfully considered, it's a consumer protection law, not a property law.
TeMPOraL 8y ago
Yeah, sure. IP is getting increasingly ridiculous over time, turning into a framework of rent seeking and abuse. IP laws were meant to incentivize individuals to work for the benefit of the society - not to protect individual's abilities for getting passive income ad infinitum.