3 ms·

Well we live in a world where cryptographic methods exist so solving identification and attribution is theoretically possible without any laws.

by golol 3y ago

warrenm 3y ago
For digital-only assets ... MAYBE (though, even a decade and a half in, we still do not know who Satoshi Nakamoto is - if even IF "he" is... and that is with one of the better attribution protocols out there) For physical assets (eg paintings), no digital "identification and attribution" could be sufficient Which is precisely why property rights (including copyRIGHT - ie the right to copy something) are enforced by force of law Without such enforcement, disbursement of creativity would plummet - outside of a relatively-insignificantly-sized population who likes giving stuff away, why would any sane person want to create something that not only could be stolen and redistributed sans attribution, but that would be?
- golol 3y ago
  >why would any sane person want to create something that not only could be stolen and redistributed sans attribution, but that would be? Well it wouldn't work with current business models, but maybe something would emerge? Some indie games or open source projects live off donations. Kickstarters exist. And of course completely free art exists. Also, if you design a chip, or a phone, or a car, I'm not sure if it's really the copyright that's stopping other people from stealing your idea. It's the tools, the people and the understanding relate dto your idea that they don't have.
  - warrenm 3y ago
    >but maybe something would emerge? Some indie games or open source projects live off donations. Kickstarters exist. And of course completely free art exists Sure - "free" (or efectively "free" (to the majority of users/enjoyers) items exist Patronage existed for millennia before the Rennaissance (and does still ... albeit in the form of member-only access and/or "publicly-funded" works) But ... that model leads to markedly closed-off generation of new work - either it is generated for private use, it is generated for "specific" public use (eg to enjoy the statue in the town square), or (in a very small handful of cases) is generated on the "good graces" of the creator (eg Tom Lehrer turning his work over to the public domain a couple years ago ... though for the previous 50+ years, it was all under copyright (and, FWIW, still is copyrighted by Lehrer, it has just been opened to the public))

Well we live in a world where cryptographic methods exist so solving identification and attribution is theoretically possible without any laws.

by golol 3y ago

Well we live in a world where cryptographic methods exist so solving identification and attribution is theoretically possible without any laws.

warrenm 3y ago

For digital-only assets ... MAYBE (though, even a decade and a half in, we still do not know who Satoshi Nakamoto is - if even IF "he" is... and that is with one of the better attribution protocols out there) For physical assets (eg paintings), no digital "identification and attribution" could be sufficient Which is precisely why property rights (including copyRIGHT - ie the right to copy something) are enforced by force of law Without such enforcement, disbursement of creativity would plummet - outside of a relatively-insignificantly-sized population who likes giving stuff away, why would any sane person want to create something that not only could be stolen and redistributed sans attribution, but that would be?

golol 3y ago
>why would any sane person want to create something that not only could be stolen and redistributed sans attribution, but that would be? Well it wouldn't work with current business models, but maybe something would emerge? Some indie games or open source projects live off donations. Kickstarters exist. And of course completely free art exists. Also, if you design a chip, or a phone, or a car, I'm not sure if it's really the copyright that's stopping other people from stealing your idea. It's the tools, the people and the understanding relate dto your idea that they don't have.
- warrenm 3y ago
  >but maybe something would emerge? Some indie games or open source projects live off donations. Kickstarters exist. And of course completely free art exists Sure - "free" (or efectively "free" (to the majority of users/enjoyers) items exist Patronage existed for millennia before the Rennaissance (and does still ... albeit in the form of member-only access and/or "publicly-funded" works) But ... that model leads to markedly closed-off generation of new work - either it is generated for private use, it is generated for "specific" public use (eg to enjoy the statue in the town square), or (in a very small handful of cases) is generated on the "good graces" of the creator (eg Tom Lehrer turning his work over to the public domain a couple years ago ... though for the previous 50+ years, it was all under copyright (and, FWIW, still is copyrighted by Lehrer, it has just been opened to the public))