5 ms·
At this point, we would be better off without any copyrights laws. It's no longer about protecting the interests of artists, creators, etc. It's about protectin
by qiskit 4y ago
At this point, we would be better off without any copyrights laws. It's no longer about protecting the interests of artists, creators, etc. It's about protecting the interests of corporations and the useless privileged elites to the detriment of society as a whole.
- mindcrime 4y agoI have to admit, I'm torn on whether or not we should have copyright / patent / etc. laws or not (and what their exact nature should be if so). But I do feel pretty strongly that IF we have those things, the time spans should be severely limited. I don't think I personally, for example, would support copyright for any duration beyond the life of the author / creator.
- mikebenfield 4y agoI disagree. If copyright exists, its term shouldn't be tied to anyone's life at all. Let's say I produce a copyrighted work, and immediately sell the rights to that work to you. Why should the value of your purchase depend on how long I live? Should the work produced by a 20 year old be more valuable than the work produced by a 70 year old because the 20 year old is less likely to drop dead and end their work's copyright?
- mindcrime 4y agoMaybe we should disallow selling / transfer of copyright rights then? Dunno, just spitballing ideas here.
- car_analogy 4y agoWhy not a flat duration? Why tie it to life of author in the first place - what's the benefit?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ddingus 4y agoOriginally, a short term answered all these questions. Remember, Disney happened because the works of the Brothers Grimm fell into what was a robust body of creative works to build on. Then Disney did not want to give in like kind as they received and we have seen extensions to copyright continue into what are now ridiculous lengths of time. Originally, the reasoning was to create an incentive for creators to create. It was not intended to be rent seeking. Creators were expected to continue to create and have a body of robust works to create with. Doing it that way advanced culture and made fortunes. We were all better for it. Today, it is not so good for all of us. Culture is less rich, less vibrant. And when I look at the likes of Disney, they own a lot, buying more all the time. When exactly do they return the free gift worth so much so others may create more? Fact is future Disney could buy those works same as they do today and find their own old works made new, valuable and worth more than returning them to the public may appear to cost.
- hulitu 4y agoI agree. Just like nuclear waste, the copyright shall last forever.
- qiskit 4y agoCopyright laws are like medicine. Ideally you want good copyright laws just like you want good medicine. If you can't get or don't have good copyright laws, it's better to have no copyright laws rather than bad copyright laws. All copyright laws do now is feed the parasites. Better to be rid of it altogether.
- ChrisLomont 4y agoAs the co-owner of Hypnocube, copyright law was the only legal protection I had from wholesale cloning of a product I created from Chinese clones - they copied the product wholesale, circuit, packaging, and code. Without copyright I could not have stopped it. This case is not unique Is that enough for protecting small individuals?