3 ms·

He's feeding slop to the low-IQ quartile of voters, nothing more. That said, I remember advocating a simple manner of obliterating the porn industry a long tim

He's feeding slop to the low-IQ quartile of voters, nothing more. That said, I remember advocating a simple manner of obliterating the porn industry a long time ago. (Not porn, mind you, but rather the nasty business of actually producing it.) Just reduce copyright protection of pornographic material to 1 day. After this, what's currently piracy would become ultra-cheap, legal trade, and it would be quickly unprofitable to finance new material.

philwelch 15y ago
There are plenty of exhibitionists who would mass-produce it for free.
- jonursenbach 15y ago
  They're already doing that now, just look at all the NSFW subreddits.
rflrob 15y ago
Strictly speaking, you could probably even revoke copyright protection for porn entirely. The relevant clause of the constitution reads, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." IANAL, but it seems like you could take an originalist interpretation and say porn is in no way a useful art, and that even if it were, while congress has the power to do so, it can probably choose not to exercise that power provide protection to some suitably broad class of works.
- prodigal_erik 15y ago
  They're still trying to figure out whether porn reduces rape. If so, that would make porn more useful than the average work of fiction, which is merely entertaining.
Moto7451 15y ago
Seeing as the various x rated tube sites have a business model thats based around the swapping of copyrighted material plus a freemium/premium option for those willing to dish out money directly or sign up for a sister site, I'm willing to bet that a one day copyright window wouldn't really make a big deal. In reality, I think the practical shelf life/copyright life of a video is a day anyways and then it ends up on a tube site or torrent. I barely watch a hollywood movie more than once, how many people who use pay sites bother going to the archives? There are probably just enough people willing to pay for day one access that it keeps the industry going.
icebraining 15y ago
I don't think that would do the trick: the porn industry would adapt and move from pure porn to movies with a actual plot and characters that would happen to have long scenes of unstimulated sex. I mean, is 9 Songs[1] porn? What about the Brown Bunny? You'd probably need a lawsuit to decide for each case. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_Songs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_Songs
Drbble 15y ago
Porn is already dirt cheap to produce and readily available for free. People pay for porn because they are lazy or stupid or look at ads for scams that abuse their stupidity. Also, your solution doesn't solve the "problem" of watching porn, which is most of the problem prudes have with porn.

philwelch 15y ago

There are plenty of exhibitionists who would mass-produce it for free.

jonursenbach 15y ago
They're already doing that now, just look at all the NSFW subreddits.

rflrob 15y ago

Strictly speaking, you could probably even revoke copyright protection for porn entirely. The relevant clause of the constitution reads, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." IANAL, but it seems like you could take an originalist interpretation and say porn is in no way a useful art, and that even if it were, while congress has the power to do so, it can probably choose not to exercise that power provide protection to some suitably broad class of works.

prodigal_erik 15y ago
They're still trying to figure out whether porn reduces rape. If so, that would make porn more useful than the average work of fiction, which is merely entertaining.

Moto7451 15y ago

Seeing as the various x rated tube sites have a business model thats based around the swapping of copyrighted material plus a freemium/premium option for those willing to dish out money directly or sign up for a sister site, I'm willing to bet that a one day copyright window wouldn't really make a big deal. In reality, I think the practical shelf life/copyright life of a video is a day anyways and then it ends up on a tube site or torrent. I barely watch a hollywood movie more than once, how many people who use pay sites bother going to the archives? There are probably just enough people willing to pay for day one access that it keeps the industry going.

icebraining 15y ago

I don't think that would do the trick: the porn industry would adapt and move from pure porn to movies with a actual plot and characters that would happen to have long scenes of unstimulated sex. I mean, is 9 Songs[1] porn? What about the Brown Bunny? You'd probably need a lawsuit to decide for each case. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_Songs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_Songs

Drbble 15y ago

Porn is already dirt cheap to produce and readily available for free. People pay for porn because they are lazy or stupid or look at ads for scams that abuse their stupidity. Also, your solution doesn't solve the "problem" of watching porn, which is most of the problem prudes have with porn.