4 ms·

Who is arguing against copyrights? Please care to enlighten us as to what the "bigger picture" is?

retube 15y ago
I'm not arguing for or against copyright. I'm just saying that basing policy on what young people think/believe is not necessarily a good idea. Obviously as you grow up and learn more about the complexities and subtleties of a particular issue your position on it might change. Things seem very black/white when you're young, when in reality there's a lot of grey areas and a lot of different opinions, agendas and competing demands to account for. Your simplistic stance/solution might in fact be a hopelessly naive one that would in reality do more harm than good. Edit: I cannot believe I am being dv'd for this. Are people seriously telling me they don't believe opinions and attitudes willl change as they get older? Do you think you're as wise as you'll ever be when you're young?
- chopsueyar 15y ago
  Your simplistic stance/solution might in fact be a hopelessly naive one that would in reality do more harm than good. This is a mistake only young people are capable of making? You are confusing young people with ignorant people.
- schrototo 15y ago
  Sure, every issue is always more complicated than people think, and I'm not saying that just ignoring copyright is necessarily the "right" thing to do. But just think about this: I am 23 years old, I barely remember a time when there was no internet. Kids today grow up taking their iPods for granted. They take for granted that music, movies, media of all kind is digital. The take for granted that is easily shared. That there is no fundamental restriction on the consumption of content. Technologically we are at the point where virtually all content is available to virtually everyone at virtually no cost. Politics and law do not matter. This reality is neither a good nor a bad thing, it just is.
- mcantor 15y ago
  I think perhaps you were downvoted because your posts were mainly attacking a straw man. I don't think anyone has been supporting the idea of basing policy solely on the beliefs of young people. (FWIW I did not downvote you)
- jokermatt999 15y ago
  I didn't downvote you, because I think you're still adding to the conversation, but I don't necessarily agree with your reasoning. While many young people's views will change over time on many issues, it seems kind of rude to assume that it's certain they will. For example (and this is not meant to be a comparison to copyright, just an example of attitudes not changing), while it appears to mostly be older people against gay marriage, that does not mean that younger people are misinformed and will change their minds on it as they grow older. Somethings are actually generational shifts in attitude, independent of the generation's age. I do agree that it's possible that the current generation may shift to a more conservative view on copyright as it ages, since that happens with many issues, but it can sound somewhat offensive depending on how you worded it. I think it's a point worth considering, but sadly many people will have a negative reaction against something that looks "You'll get it when you're older", and that may prevent them from considering the idea in a more neutral light. As for whether it's correct, I'd lean towards "No". I think young people who grow up to produce content they want to commercially develop may, but that's likely going to be a minority. I don't think the majority that casually illegally download things without a second thought will have a change of heart. It being wrong just doesn't seem to enter most people's minds. I think part of the reason is the overly harsh propaganda against it. While there is a core ideal worth considering ("Artists should be compensated for their work"), the ridiculous exaggeration ("Pirating movies supports TERRORISM") leads to people ignoring the issue.
  - alexqgb 15y ago
    It's also worth noting that copyright law is not something that encapsulates the kind of deep wisdom that only age produces. Indeed, the very new and deeply intractable problem of the law vs. reality is that in the digital world, anything you do involves copies. Suddenly, there’s no part of human intellectual activity that’s outside copyright regulation. If anything, wisdom regards this with horror. The current, and notoriously short-sighted beneficiaries of the copyright cartel see this as a good thing, as it appears to hand them a massive (and totally unearned) expansion of their power. The (mostly young) people who are most exposed to this hubris display a reassuringly mature recognition of this badness, and resist accordingly. Good government (i.e. government of, by, and for the people) would avoid open conflict by adjusting the law to the benefit of the people's constitutional liberties, challenging the old commercial order to adapt peacefully or die gracefully. The fact that this isn't happening is de facto evidence of growing corruption. If anything, the wisdom of age makes this less - not more - tolerable as time goes by. After all, there is no precedent (at least in America) that suggests a system providing total domination over all aspects of cultural and intellectual is a good and worthwhile thing. Indeed, much of America's involvement in the 20th Century revolved around violent opposition to the horrific and miserable places that did try to institute this level of control. Today, we're discovering that we can't even be 'friends' with countries that behave like this (Exhibit A: Egypt), since majorities everywhere find these orders deeply hateful, rendering them inherently unstable. Indeed, no modern totalitarian regime has survived for more than a few decades, let alone the lifetimes that democratic republics boast.

I'm not arguing for or against copyright. I'm just saying that basing policy on what young people think/believe is not necessarily a good idea. Obviously as you grow up and learn more about the complexities and subtleties of a particular issue your position on it might change. Things seem very black/white when you're young, when in reality there's a lot of grey areas and a lot of different opinions, agendas and competing demands to account for. Your simplistic stance/solution might in fact be a hopelessly naive one that would in reality do more harm than good. Edit: I cannot believe I am being dv'd for this. Are people seriously telling me they don't believe opinions and attitudes willl change as they get older? Do you think you're as wise as you'll ever be when you're young?

chopsueyar 15y ago
Your simplistic stance/solution might in fact be a hopelessly naive one that would in reality do more harm than good. This is a mistake only young people are capable of making? You are confusing young people with ignorant people.
schrototo 15y ago
Sure, every issue is always more complicated than people think, and I'm not saying that just ignoring copyright is necessarily the "right" thing to do. But just think about this: I am 23 years old, I barely remember a time when there was no internet. Kids today grow up taking their iPods for granted. They take for granted that music, movies, media of all kind is digital. The take for granted that is easily shared. That there is no fundamental restriction on the consumption of content. Technologically we are at the point where virtually all content is available to virtually everyone at virtually no cost. Politics and law do not matter. This reality is neither a good nor a bad thing, it just is.
mcantor 15y ago
I think perhaps you were downvoted because your posts were mainly attacking a straw man. I don't think anyone has been supporting the idea of basing policy solely on the beliefs of young people. (FWIW I did not downvote you)
jokermatt999 15y ago
I didn't downvote you, because I think you're still adding to the conversation, but I don't necessarily agree with your reasoning. While many young people's views will change over time on many issues, it seems kind of rude to assume that it's certain they will. For example (and this is not meant to be a comparison to copyright, just an example of attitudes not changing), while it appears to mostly be older people against gay marriage, that does not mean that younger people are misinformed and will change their minds on it as they grow older. Somethings are actually generational shifts in attitude, independent of the generation's age. I do agree that it's possible that the current generation may shift to a more conservative view on copyright as it ages, since that happens with many issues, but it can sound somewhat offensive depending on how you worded it. I think it's a point worth considering, but sadly many people will have a negative reaction against something that looks "You'll get it when you're older", and that may prevent them from considering the idea in a more neutral light. As for whether it's correct, I'd lean towards "No". I think young people who grow up to produce content they want to commercially develop may, but that's likely going to be a minority. I don't think the majority that casually illegally download things without a second thought will have a change of heart. It being wrong just doesn't seem to enter most people's minds. I think part of the reason is the overly harsh propaganda against it. While there is a core ideal worth considering ("Artists should be compensated for their work"), the ridiculous exaggeration ("Pirating movies supports TERRORISM") leads to people ignoring the issue.
- alexqgb 15y ago
  It's also worth noting that copyright law is not something that encapsulates the kind of deep wisdom that only age produces. Indeed, the very new and deeply intractable problem of the law vs. reality is that in the digital world, anything you do involves copies. Suddenly, there’s no part of human intellectual activity that’s outside copyright regulation. If anything, wisdom regards this with horror. The current, and notoriously short-sighted beneficiaries of the copyright cartel see this as a good thing, as it appears to hand them a massive (and totally unearned) expansion of their power. The (mostly young) people who are most exposed to this hubris display a reassuringly mature recognition of this badness, and resist accordingly. Good government (i.e. government of, by, and for the people) would avoid open conflict by adjusting the law to the benefit of the people's constitutional liberties, challenging the old commercial order to adapt peacefully or die gracefully. The fact that this isn't happening is de facto evidence of growing corruption. If anything, the wisdom of age makes this less - not more - tolerable as time goes by. After all, there is no precedent (at least in America) that suggests a system providing total domination over all aspects of cultural and intellectual is a good and worthwhile thing. Indeed, much of America's involvement in the 20th Century revolved around violent opposition to the horrific and miserable places that did try to institute this level of control. Today, we're discovering that we can't even be 'friends' with countries that behave like this (Exhibit A: Egypt), since majorities everywhere find these orders deeply hateful, rendering them inherently unstable. Indeed, no modern totalitarian regime has survived for more than a few decades, let alone the lifetimes that democratic republics boast.