5 ms·
I’m going to pile on, but it’s important that it’s part of the copyright discussion: Current copyright is dramatically limiting culture and cultural growth. A
by joshspankit 4y ago
I’m going to pile on, but it’s important that it’s part of the copyright discussion:
Current copyright is dramatically limiting culture and cultural growth.
Any artist now needs to make sure that they are not inadvertently copying anything from their entire lifetime, and that of their parents.
It’s rarely good enough that an artist shows that they had never been exposed to a previous work, and so now I see artists taking one of two paths: 1) working in secret, trying desperately to thread the needle between making a living creating and losing it all by being discovered. 2) Forgoing the idea of true creative expression altogether, and limiting themselves to samples that they can pay for up front.
- rsch 4y agoSteamboat Willie is from 1928, almost a hundred years ago. And it is still under copyright. So you can make that “the lifetime of their grandparents” too.
- slim 4y agoit's actually shrinking the realm of ideas (culture) by design. since ideas are "property" their value is function of their rareness. economic forces are literally creating artificial scarcity of ideas.
- BLKNSLVR 4y agoOn the topic of artificial scarcity, once food becomes quickly and easily synthesisable on consumer premises, does anyone think that will not be incredibly heavily gate-kept by roles similar, or even identical, to copyright as it is now?
- Plasmoid 4y agoWe already do that. Regional appellations limit what food can be called. It's not champagne if it's not from a specific part of France.
- happymellon 4y agoIt's a shame that Cheddar doesn't get the same protections, so the most tasteless rubbish gets the branding. People get around it by producing Fauxpaign under various other names.
- PeterisP 4y agoIt limits only the marketing - you're free to make sparkling wine that's exactly like champagne.
- joshspankit 4y agoMic drop