4 ms·

The converse, however, would be to declare porn to be useful art, and thus deserving of the constitutional protections granted thereto. I have my popcorn at th

The converse, however, would be to declare porn to be useful art, and thus deserving of the constitutional protections granted thereto. I have my popcorn at the ready.

fl3tch 15y ago
It's already Constitutionally protected as speech. That's why it's not illegal anywhere in America, even though other "vices" like alcohol are.
- icebraining 15y ago
  But speech doesn't necessarily have to be protected by copyright.
fragsworth 15y ago
Declaring pornography to be unprotected by copyright on account of "it is not useful" is an extremely scary proposition to me. The apathetic responses in this discussion are also pretty scary. Try to understand the potential implications here. People enjoy it - if that is not enough to declare that it is "useful", then what is? How can you define any other forms of entertainment to be "useful"? How far-fetched would it be to eventually declare video games to be not "useful"? Or movies?
- bad_user 15y ago
  Seeing how copyright is being used to undermine people's constitutional rights, I think copyright should be abolished for absolutely all works, not just for porn. The concept of copyright is broken. We need something new and that doesn't go against the human nature or against people's constitutional rights. We need something that doesn't restrict sharing or freedom of speech. How far-fetched would it be to eventually declare video games to be not "useful"? Or movies? Not as far-fetched as SOPA.
  - magicalist 15y ago
    Are you saying that copyright should be abolished in conjunction with replacing it with a new system? Or that abolishing it altogether would be acceptable? I'm not sure I can imagine that transition. Copyright (and the patent system) are fundamentally broken in the US, but I don't agree that perpetual copyright terms and SOPA follow naturally from any legal copyright system. I'm a believer in limited copyright actually encouraging innovation, and that includes with restrictions on sharing and freedom of speech (eg I publish a book, I don't believe it should be a form of protected speech to then make a copy of that book and distribute it. On the other hand, I also don't believe that should be a felony or that you owe damages of more money than you might make in your lifetime). Freedom of speech is already restricted in many ways, and not just in ways that a cynic would point out. None of us lives alone on this planet, which implies that we will have to make concessions in systems already without an optimal solution for all parties.
pbhjpbhj 15y ago
It's "Useful Arts" and it has a quite distinct meaning from the modern conflation of useful & art. I implore those commenting to consult a reference source.

The converse, however, would be to declare porn to be useful art, and thus deserving of the constitutional protections granted thereto. I have my popcorn at the ready.

fl3tch 15y ago

It's already Constitutionally protected as speech. That's why it's not illegal anywhere in America, even though other "vices" like alcohol are.

icebraining 15y ago
But speech doesn't necessarily have to be protected by copyright.

fragsworth 15y ago

Declaring pornography to be unprotected by copyright on account of "it is not useful" is an extremely scary proposition to me. The apathetic responses in this discussion are also pretty scary. Try to understand the potential implications here. People enjoy it - if that is not enough to declare that it is "useful", then what is? How can you define any other forms of entertainment to be "useful"? How far-fetched would it be to eventually declare video games to be not "useful"? Or movies?

bad_user 15y ago
Seeing how copyright is being used to undermine people's constitutional rights, I think copyright should be abolished for absolutely all works, not just for porn. The concept of copyright is broken. We need something new and that doesn't go against the human nature or against people's constitutional rights. We need something that doesn't restrict sharing or freedom of speech. How far-fetched would it be to eventually declare video games to be not "useful"? Or movies? Not as far-fetched as SOPA.
- magicalist 15y ago
  Are you saying that copyright should be abolished in conjunction with replacing it with a new system? Or that abolishing it altogether would be acceptable? I'm not sure I can imagine that transition. Copyright (and the patent system) are fundamentally broken in the US, but I don't agree that perpetual copyright terms and SOPA follow naturally from any legal copyright system. I'm a believer in limited copyright actually encouraging innovation, and that includes with restrictions on sharing and freedom of speech (eg I publish a book, I don't believe it should be a form of protected speech to then make a copy of that book and distribute it. On the other hand, I also don't believe that should be a felony or that you owe damages of more money than you might make in your lifetime). Freedom of speech is already restricted in many ways, and not just in ways that a cynic would point out. None of us lives alone on this planet, which implies that we will have to make concessions in systems already without an optimal solution for all parties.

pbhjpbhj 15y ago

It's "Useful Arts" and it has a quite distinct meaning from the modern conflation of useful & art. I implore those commenting to consult a reference source.