3 ms·

So if you limit copyright, how do you intend to monetise original expression? Or you don’t agree such things should be monetised

• dave_sullivan 6y ago
  They are free to make money during the term of the copyright, but that term should be reduced by a lot. And I don't think the definition of copyright should be extended to include someone's voice, style, appearance, recipes, or others that I'm leaving out.
  • onethought 6y ago
    Is it an extension? (I know technically it is). Voice could be captured as accent/pitch/tone... I guess it’s a problem as there would be too much natural overlap, so not really a novel expression.
    • TeMPOraL 6y ago
      Maybe voice would be better suited to trademark protection? After all, it isn't really about accent/pitch/tone, but about being sure that if something sounds like it's voiced by $VoiceActor, it's actually voiced by $VoiceActor (and $VoiceActor gets their cut of royalties/recognition).