5 ms·

When do we get to the point where people start acknowledging how insane the entire concept of copyright is.

bufferoverflow 7y ago
The copyright concept is fine. Creators should enjoy the ownership of the products of their labor. The problem is with the youtube's implementation. There are no negative effects for the large players who falsely claim copyright.
- OrgNet 7y ago
  Copyright is not fine... it lasts way too long.
  - marcinzm 7y ago
    Which has nothing to do with copyright the concept but our particular current implementation of it.
    - OrgNet 7y ago
      > The problem is with the youtube's implementation it is not.. it is with the existing laws
      - marcinzm 7y ago
        Our laws are the implementation of copyright I’m talking about and are distinct from the concept of copyright.
        OrgNet 7y ago
        I understand that but I was not replying to you initially... we were talking about youtube's implementation of copyright law
    - gdy 7y ago
      Also communism is fine, a few failed implementations don't prove the opposite.
      - marcinzm 7y ago
        Socialism is doing quiet well in Europe and seem to provides a much better standard of living for the average person than America's capitalism implementation.
        gdy 7y ago
        I wouldn't call that a socialism.
    - imtringued 7y ago
      You're not going to see any other implementation any time soon.
  - chillacy 7y ago
    Isn’t that an implementation detail?
    - OrgNet 7y ago
      not really, if your implementation has to comply with laws... more like an implementation requirement
- perl4ever 7y ago
  "Creators should enjoy the ownership of the products of their labor." The basic issue some are concerned with is that "ownership" of intellectual property gives people or entities rights that infringe on regular property rights. There's an inherent conflict, so you can't just maximize both at once.
josteink 7y ago
Copyright as a concept isn’t insane. How it’s implemented in current law is though. And it’s getting worse. That’s the problem, not copyright itself.
vpribish 7y ago
hopefully never as the concept is sound.
IAmGraydon 7y ago
Copyright is necessary and isn’t the problem here. What is the problem is Youtube’s refusal to require any verification when a copyright claim is made. YouTube has essentially created a society that doesn’t abide by due process because it’s a virtual society and therefore isn’t required to follow the same laws that physical societies are held to. This is a symptom of a much more dangerous problem - as we exist more and more in the online world, we are subject to whatever contrived laws the owners of that world decide to create. Those laws have serious fallout in the real world, like complete loss of income due to bogus copyright claims.
- icebraining 7y ago
  The DMCA law itself says the host can't require any such verification, and if YT started requiring it for ContentID, the complainers could just start sending regular DMCA takedowns.
  - chii 7y ago
    which is better, because regular DMCA claims comes with a legal repercussion risk - you cannot file a false DMCA claim without punishment from the law. But youtube contentID claim is not DMCA, and has no punishment attached for a wrong claim.
    - icebraining 7y ago
      As ryani points out in another comment[1], the punishable part is so narrow as to be irrelevant. Which is why nobody ever was punished for that. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19955838 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19955838
- faissaloo 7y ago
  I reject the notion that copyright is necessary, what's necessary is my personal ability to use my devices without random companies being able to use the state to punish me for using an abstract concept that may or may not resemble one that they at some point also used. If you would like to make money from your art there are options such as commisions, but the onus is on you to find a business model that works, it is not for the government to be creating artificial monopolies to facilitate a business model that is incompatible with reality.

The copyright concept is fine. Creators should enjoy the ownership of the products of their labor. The problem is with the youtube's implementation. There are no negative effects for the large players who falsely claim copyright.

OrgNet 7y ago
Copyright is not fine... it lasts way too long.
- marcinzm 7y ago
  Which has nothing to do with copyright the concept but our particular current implementation of it.
  - OrgNet 7y ago
    > The problem is with the youtube's implementation it is not.. it is with the existing laws
    - marcinzm 7y ago
      Our laws are the implementation of copyright I’m talking about and are distinct from the concept of copyright.
      - OrgNet 7y ago
        I understand that but I was not replying to you initially... we were talking about youtube's implementation of copyright law
  - gdy 7y ago
    Also communism is fine, a few failed implementations don't prove the opposite.
    - marcinzm 7y ago
      Socialism is doing quiet well in Europe and seem to provides a much better standard of living for the average person than America's capitalism implementation.
      - gdy 7y ago
        I wouldn't call that a socialism.
  - imtringued 7y ago
    You're not going to see any other implementation any time soon.
- chillacy 7y ago
  Isn’t that an implementation detail?
  - OrgNet 7y ago
    not really, if your implementation has to comply with laws... more like an implementation requirement
perl4ever 7y ago
"Creators should enjoy the ownership of the products of their labor." The basic issue some are concerned with is that "ownership" of intellectual property gives people or entities rights that infringe on regular property rights. There's an inherent conflict, so you can't just maximize both at once.

josteink 7y ago

Copyright as a concept isn’t insane. How it’s implemented in current law is though. And it’s getting worse. That’s the problem, not copyright itself.

vpribish 7y ago

hopefully never as the concept is sound.

IAmGraydon 7y ago

Copyright is necessary and isn’t the problem here. What is the problem is Youtube’s refusal to require any verification when a copyright claim is made. YouTube has essentially created a society that doesn’t abide by due process because it’s a virtual society and therefore isn’t required to follow the same laws that physical societies are held to. This is a symptom of a much more dangerous problem - as we exist more and more in the online world, we are subject to whatever contrived laws the owners of that world decide to create. Those laws have serious fallout in the real world, like complete loss of income due to bogus copyright claims.

icebraining 7y ago
The DMCA law itself says the host can't require any such verification, and if YT started requiring it for ContentID, the complainers could just start sending regular DMCA takedowns.
- chii 7y ago
  which is better, because regular DMCA claims comes with a legal repercussion risk - you cannot file a false DMCA claim without punishment from the law. But youtube contentID claim is not DMCA, and has no punishment attached for a wrong claim.
  - icebraining 7y ago
    As ryani points out in another comment[1], the punishable part is so narrow as to be irrelevant. Which is why nobody ever was punished for that. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19955838 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19955838
faissaloo 7y ago
I reject the notion that copyright is necessary, what's necessary is my personal ability to use my devices without random companies being able to use the state to punish me for using an abstract concept that may or may not resemble one that they at some point also used. If you would like to make money from your art there are options such as commisions, but the onus is on you to find a business model that works, it is not for the government to be creating artificial monopolies to facilitate a business model that is incompatible with reality.