3 ms·
The DMCA is for publishers, not creators. If Rousseau would just conform to the system and give a publisher a cut everything would be fine. Independent creators
by EvanAnderson 7y ago
The DMCA is for publishers, not creators. If Rousseau would just conform to the system and give a publisher a cut everything would be fine. Independent creators have always been the enemy.
Edit: I am being completely sarcastic w/ respect to the second sentence. I believe that there are people (those who are enriched by the current copyright system) who do believe that, though.
- wbhart 7y agoI assume you are being facetious. Rousseau doesn't owe anything to any publisher. Just checking you understood this.
- EvanAnderson 7y agoI am being facetious, but I daresay a lot of people who work in the publishing industry sincerely believe that viewpoint. I believe we're living in a time when publishers are becoming increasingly irrelevant. They're clawing onto anything they can to retain their position as middlemen and as a tax on commerce.
- Gibbon1 7y agoYears ago read a music exec claim that 'republishing' content should re-extend copyright.
- wbl 7y agoThe publisher is not entitled to that cut. In fact this doesnt involve the DCMA at all but YouTube's own process.
- EvanAnderson 7y agoI don't think publishers are entitled to anything, but I bet that publishers do. Content ID exists as a response to the DMCA, which was heavily lobbied-for by publishers. Content ID wouldn't exist if not for that lobbying.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]