7 ms·

What does this have to do with anything? Libraries handle the preserving and sharing to the public of information. In spite of copyright, not thanks to it. Hi

What does this have to do with anything? Libraries handle the preserving and sharing to the public of information. In spite of copyright, not thanks to it. Historically they literally copied one book into paper to duplicate/preserve it. That would be copyright infringement now. And more recently copyright holders are trying to delete any archives that could be used for that purpose like the internet archive or LibGen. In other media we have game roms and copies of shows being illegal. Same treatment if it has been a week since release or it's been 20 years and you can't get it legally from anywhere.

qwytw 3y ago
It was basically impossible to survive solely as a writer until copyright. Imagine publishing a book in the 16th century. At best you'd get some royalties from the initial publisher. After that if you work becomes popular every printer across the continent can start printing copies without paying you anything. That's obviously a huge impediment to innovation and progress.
- account42 3y ago
  So? There are plenty of written works from before copyright. There would be more if we had been better about preservation. People will still write without copyright. Maybe the quality will even go up as there are fewer incentives for quantity over quality. If your argument for copyright relies on protecting speicific jobs then you have no argument. Jobs become obsolete all the time. If you want welfare then argue for that. Best if it isn't restricted to a small class of people.
  - qwytw 3y ago
    > People will still write without copyright Yes. Way less of them do cause very few people could afford to write. > Maybe the quality will even go up as there are fewer incentives for quantity over quality Maybe people who write/etc. time on average produce better quality than those who can only dedicate a few hours per day for it. Also you want to eradicate entire creative industries like cinema and television for no apparent reason. > If your argument for copyright relies on protecting speicific jobs then you have no argument No my argument is that copyright protection (including patents) was one of the main driving forces behind the progress of human progress over the last 300-500 years. Obviously the current system is not perfect, I'm not saying it is... Overall it still made the world a much better place than it would have been without it.
    - matheusmoreira 3y ago
      Then let's agree to limit it to 10 years. That's a tolerable amount of time. More than enough for these corporations to turn a profit many times over.

qwytw 3y ago

It was basically impossible to survive solely as a writer until copyright. Imagine publishing a book in the 16th century. At best you'd get some royalties from the initial publisher. After that if you work becomes popular every printer across the continent can start printing copies without paying you anything. That's obviously a huge impediment to innovation and progress.

account42 3y ago
So? There are plenty of written works from before copyright. There would be more if we had been better about preservation. People will still write without copyright. Maybe the quality will even go up as there are fewer incentives for quantity over quality. If your argument for copyright relies on protecting speicific jobs then you have no argument. Jobs become obsolete all the time. If you want welfare then argue for that. Best if it isn't restricted to a small class of people.
- qwytw 3y ago
  > People will still write without copyright Yes. Way less of them do cause very few people could afford to write. > Maybe the quality will even go up as there are fewer incentives for quantity over quality Maybe people who write/etc. time on average produce better quality than those who can only dedicate a few hours per day for it. Also you want to eradicate entire creative industries like cinema and television for no apparent reason. > If your argument for copyright relies on protecting speicific jobs then you have no argument No my argument is that copyright protection (including patents) was one of the main driving forces behind the progress of human progress over the last 300-500 years. Obviously the current system is not perfect, I'm not saying it is... Overall it still made the world a much better place than it would have been without it.
  - matheusmoreira 3y ago
    Then let's agree to limit it to 10 years. That's a tolerable amount of time. More than enough for these corporations to turn a profit many times over.