3 ms·

If this was to happen, and we created a world where there was no form of copyright: why would somebody spend their life in a creative industry making new things

by 314 4y ago

If this was to happen, and we created a world where there was no form of copyright: why would somebody spend their life in a creative industry making new things?

Siira 4y ago
Most of the entertainment I have consumed in recent years has been made by amateurs that at most got donations. Besides, there can be subsidies. The current copyright law is already a subsidy, but it’s selling off the society’s natural rights instead of petty tax money.
UweSchmidt 4y ago
Without copyright people can make even more things. Bring out your own Mickey Mouse - Star Wars crossover, NSFW! Imagine the entire corpus of human creation, free to be remixed and extended. For now we hope they make a good sequel, someday...
- datagram 4y ago
  Most of that corpus was only created because it was profitable to do so due to the protections offered by copyright law.
matheusmoreira 4y ago
Intrinsic motivation to create. Also, there's no reason they can't make money some other way. Patronage and crowdfunding seem to be the answer.
- 314 4y ago
  They don't seem like a very good answer. Allowing creative output to be freely used, while forcing creators to subsist on the crumbs thrown back is a two-class system. It seems unfair to those doing the work in such a system. Copyright is far from perfect (far far...) but it is still an improvement on patronage. At least a creator has control over the use of their work.
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    > It seems unfair to those doing the work in such a system. It's the only thing that makes sense in the 21st century. Copyright is unenforceable in the age of ubiquitous networked computers. In order to enforce copyright, every computer will have to be locked down so that they only execute "compliant" software. Surely everyone browsing this site can appreciate the unfairness of that outcome. I for one do not want such a future under any circumstances. If the copyright business model is killed, so be it. > At least a creator has control over the use of their work. An illusion. They have no control. Their copyrights are infringed every single day. Most of the time people don't even realize they are infringing someone's copyright.
    - 314 4y ago
      > In order to enforce copyright, every computer will have to be locked down so that they only execute "compliant" software. This is not true. While it is one possible approach to enforcing copyright, it is not the only possible approach. Network surveillance of distribution is another possibility that has been against p2p networks. Copyright has never been completely enforcable. It has always been a partial solution aimed at preventing organized / profitable distribution, i.e. it is a legal fallback rather than a prevention. But a partially working solution is better than nothing.

by 314 4y ago

If this was to happen, and we created a world where there was no form of copyright: why would somebody spend their life in a creative industry making new things?

Siira 4y ago

Most of the entertainment I have consumed in recent years has been made by amateurs that at most got donations. Besides, there can be subsidies. The current copyright law is already a subsidy, but it’s selling off the society’s natural rights instead of petty tax money.

UweSchmidt 4y ago

Without copyright people can make even more things. Bring out your own Mickey Mouse - Star Wars crossover, NSFW! Imagine the entire corpus of human creation, free to be remixed and extended. For now we hope they make a good sequel, someday...

datagram 4y ago
Most of that corpus was only created because it was profitable to do so due to the protections offered by copyright law.

matheusmoreira 4y ago

Intrinsic motivation to create. Also, there's no reason they can't make money some other way. Patronage and crowdfunding seem to be the answer.

314 4y ago
They don't seem like a very good answer. Allowing creative output to be freely used, while forcing creators to subsist on the crumbs thrown back is a two-class system. It seems unfair to those doing the work in such a system. Copyright is far from perfect (far far...) but it is still an improvement on patronage. At least a creator has control over the use of their work.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > It seems unfair to those doing the work in such a system. It's the only thing that makes sense in the 21st century. Copyright is unenforceable in the age of ubiquitous networked computers. In order to enforce copyright, every computer will have to be locked down so that they only execute "compliant" software. Surely everyone browsing this site can appreciate the unfairness of that outcome. I for one do not want such a future under any circumstances. If the copyright business model is killed, so be it. > At least a creator has control over the use of their work. An illusion. They have no control. Their copyrights are infringed every single day. Most of the time people don't even realize they are infringing someone's copyright.
  - 314 4y ago
    > In order to enforce copyright, every computer will have to be locked down so that they only execute "compliant" software. This is not true. While it is one possible approach to enforcing copyright, it is not the only possible approach. Network surveillance of distribution is another possibility that has been against p2p networks. Copyright has never been completely enforcable. It has always been a partial solution aimed at preventing organized / profitable distribution, i.e. it is a legal fallback rather than a prevention. But a partially working solution is better than nothing.