4 ms·

Most users do pay for music via streaming services though. > Creative works may be protected by means of the existing contract system, anything beyond that is

Most users do pay for music via streaming services though. > Creative works may be protected by means of the existing contract system, anything beyond that is grossly controlling and leads to absurd situations How can a contract protect me from someone not bound by it. If I publish a novel then what, I provide a license that provides a penalty for copying my creative work (now we're back at modern IP laws but with more work for creators), but I'm not protected if someone not party to the contract copies the work and puts it online. It might increase the amount of amateur art in the world. But, most of that isn't very good. Good artists need to survive and get paid so they can focus on creating more works. Some IP laws help that. > Same thing goes for graphic design etc. But you're saying that if I see good graphic design somewhere, I can just take it and use it. No need to hire anyone except for bespoke branding, which most work doesn't need.

faissaloo 7y ago
>Most users do pay for music via streaming services though. Not in my experience, people usually either just use the free version or use a youtube to mp3 converter and keep that version. >How can a contract protect me from someone not bound by it. That's the point, you shouldn't be. >But, most of that isn't very good. Good artists need to survive and get paid so they can focus on creating more works. I prefer ameteur art and believe it has more societal value. >But you're saying that if I see good graphic design somewhere, I can just take it and use it Sure, but you still need brand recognition and you still can't create counterfeits ergo a graphic designer is still in your best interests.
- joshuamorton 7y ago
  > Not in my experience, people usually either just use the free version or use a youtube to mp3 converter and keep that version. Consider that your experience may not be the norm. Spotify and apple music have a combined 170 million subscribers. Not to mention various other ways of consuming music by paying for it. > That's the point, you shouldn't be Then how do I make a living? > I prefer ameteur art and believe it has more societal value. And you're willing to decide that all of society must bow to your whims? Amateur artists are important, but almost by definition their products won't be as good as professional artists. They can't put in the same amount of practice. > Sure, but you still need brand recognition and you still can't create counterfeits Erm, why not? IP law is what prevents counter fitting. You've previously suggested that copying and reselling am artistic work is fine, so why couldn't I also copy and resell any other work or brand? What's to prevent me from sticking the Gucci logo on a purse? Currently the answer is IP law.
  - comex 7y ago
    Personally I think it's unhelpful to group together copyrights, trademarks, and patents into the single term "IP". What prevents counterfeiting is trademark law, which is the most innocuous of the bunch; I haven't seen many cases where something I see as societally beneficial is stopped by trademarks. Copyrights and patents, on the other hand...
  - faissaloo 7y ago
    >Consider that your experience may not be the norm. Spotify and apple music have a combined 170 million subscribers. Not to mention various other ways of consuming music by paying for it 170 million is a vanishingly small number. >Then how do I make a living? By doing something people are willing to pay you for. >And you're willing to decide that all of society must bow to your whims? Either ameteur artists get screwed or professional ones do, I value ameteur artists more ergo I sacrifice the professional. >You've previously suggested that copying and reselling am artistic work is fine, so why couldn't I also copy and resell any other work or brand? Reselling an artistic work is fine, claiming a product was made by someone it wasn't is lying to the consumer.

faissaloo 7y ago

>Most users do pay for music via streaming services though. Not in my experience, people usually either just use the free version or use a youtube to mp3 converter and keep that version. >How can a contract protect me from someone not bound by it. That's the point, you shouldn't be. >But, most of that isn't very good. Good artists need to survive and get paid so they can focus on creating more works. I prefer ameteur art and believe it has more societal value. >But you're saying that if I see good graphic design somewhere, I can just take it and use it Sure, but you still need brand recognition and you still can't create counterfeits ergo a graphic designer is still in your best interests.

joshuamorton 7y ago
> Not in my experience, people usually either just use the free version or use a youtube to mp3 converter and keep that version. Consider that your experience may not be the norm. Spotify and apple music have a combined 170 million subscribers. Not to mention various other ways of consuming music by paying for it. > That's the point, you shouldn't be Then how do I make a living? > I prefer ameteur art and believe it has more societal value. And you're willing to decide that all of society must bow to your whims? Amateur artists are important, but almost by definition their products won't be as good as professional artists. They can't put in the same amount of practice. > Sure, but you still need brand recognition and you still can't create counterfeits Erm, why not? IP law is what prevents counter fitting. You've previously suggested that copying and reselling am artistic work is fine, so why couldn't I also copy and resell any other work or brand? What's to prevent me from sticking the Gucci logo on a purse? Currently the answer is IP law.
- comex 7y ago
  Personally I think it's unhelpful to group together copyrights, trademarks, and patents into the single term "IP". What prevents counterfeiting is trademark law, which is the most innocuous of the bunch; I haven't seen many cases where something I see as societally beneficial is stopped by trademarks. Copyrights and patents, on the other hand...
- faissaloo 7y ago
  >Consider that your experience may not be the norm. Spotify and apple music have a combined 170 million subscribers. Not to mention various other ways of consuming music by paying for it 170 million is a vanishingly small number. >Then how do I make a living? By doing something people are willing to pay you for. >And you're willing to decide that all of society must bow to your whims? Either ameteur artists get screwed or professional ones do, I value ameteur artists more ergo I sacrifice the professional. >You've previously suggested that copying and reselling am artistic work is fine, so why couldn't I also copy and resell any other work or brand? Reselling an artistic work is fine, claiming a product was made by someone it wasn't is lying to the consumer.