4 ms·

> It's also easy to see that, by far, artists don't create things to actually make a living from copyright-based forced royalties. I would expect the exact opp

> It's also easy to see that, by far, artists don't create things to actually make a living from copyright-based forced royalties. I would expect the exact opposite. Do you have any data? I’d expect the primary money maker for artists is people buying their products or getting those products from the channels the artist chooses. E.g buying a dvd or watching my show on Netflix or watching my video on my YouTube channel or buying a print of my drawing. Patreon processes payments of less than a billion dollars per year, so artists’ money seems to be, by far, made via copyright protection. There’s a question about what fraction of artists make a living, and I expect the majority don’t make a living from it. Most artists probably don’t do it for the money. Most probably just have it as a hobby. That said I’m glad some artists can make a living at it. I have yet to see any evidence that switching to a copyright free world would help anyone but the hobbyists and big companies who can afford to exploit the fruits of the hobbyists labors (I imagine some kind of YouTube like company going around taking everyone’s content and putting it in a central place and making bank off ads). You seem to be getting at this with your mention about the need for “anti-tivoization” regulation. When you flesh that out, trying to regulate away the worst exploitative practices and enabling a professional class of artists, you’d end up with something that looks a lot like copyright law.

namibj 6y ago
Yes, I expect that to be the currently primary income pathway for artists, but I share your expectation about the majority not being able to live from it. The primary issue with copyright aren't the royalties, it's the bookkeeping (and, to a lesser extend, things like translations being at the mercy of the copyright owner). I gave Patreon as something that showed that we appear to be cable of funding art without relying on copyright. I doubt the part about the big corp succeeding by fleecing everyone with ads. Have you seen the UX of e.g. popcorntime? If not, I suggest to read up on just how low friction these things already are, and that's with the typical use being illegal. And no, the anti-tivoization part is about preventing corporations from using DRM and/or hardware-locking to stop users from modifying the software running on their devices. I'd want exceptions for systems that are fully restricted from any kind of software/firmware update, like e.g. Yubikeys. But if systems support software updates, the user must not be prevented from running their own code on hardware they own, though of course a way to lock systems permanently down is reasonable and likely needed for cases where the owner can't ensure physical security.

namibj 6y ago

Yes, I expect that to be the currently primary income pathway for artists, but I share your expectation about the majority not being able to live from it. The primary issue with copyright aren't the royalties, it's the bookkeeping (and, to a lesser extend, things like translations being at the mercy of the copyright owner). I gave Patreon as something that showed that we appear to be cable of funding art without relying on copyright. I doubt the part about the big corp succeeding by fleecing everyone with ads. Have you seen the UX of e.g. popcorntime? If not, I suggest to read up on just how low friction these things already are, and that's with the typical use being illegal. And no, the anti-tivoization part is about preventing corporations from using DRM and/or hardware-locking to stop users from modifying the software running on their devices. I'd want exceptions for systems that are fully restricted from any kind of software/firmware update, like e.g. Yubikeys. But if systems support software updates, the user must not be prevented from running their own code on hardware they own, though of course a way to lock systems permanently down is reasonable and likely needed for cases where the owner can't ensure physical security.