4 ms·
What does this do to the whole "but art will cease to exist if artists can't have absurd monopoly rights over copyrighted material" argument, which the MAFIAA s
by vibrunazo 15y ago
What does this do to the whole "but art will cease to exist if artists can't have absurd monopoly rights over copyrighted material" argument, which the MAFIAA seem to love so much?
If people are willing to fund arts regardless of legal obligation. Then the number one pillar sustaining the copyright "morals" gets easily destroyed. Crowdfunding demonstrates that if we completely remove copyright laws: art will survive.
- kingkawn 15y agohooray!
- adestefan 15y agoI have no idea how you're making that connection. It also doesn't help your argument when you use "MAFIAA."
- vibrunazo 15y agoIf people are willing to fund arts, even without being forced to. Then art will still be funded, even if there are no laws forcing people to. Which is the opposite of the main pillar argument for copyright enforcement.
- simonsarris 15y ago> Crowdfunding demonstrates that if we completely remove copyright laws: art will survive. Yes, though I think all that was sufficient to reach that conclusion was all the art that lived long before copyright laws ever existed in the first place. (And I hope copyright lovers admit that Shakespeare, if there was copyright in his day, would have probably created fewer works, not more. In fact it's possible he and others produced so many works precisely because there was no copy protection!)