2 ms·

> Is that wrong? Honestly I don't think so. This is one of the things that's always bothered me about copyright, that for the entire history of humanity storyt

by Spivak 3y ago

> Is that wrong? Honestly I don't think so. This is one of the things that's always bothered me about copyright, that for the entire history of humanity storytelling has been a place where practitioners build on one another and add their own takes and ideas. Stories are shared and become part of people's cultural and personal identities and I don't think they should be able to be owned to the degree they are today. Copying your Phantom Menace DVD I think is totally fine to be illegal but making your own take on it, making art based on it, or telling other stories the same universe I think should be allowed. I would require compulsory licensing and percentage fee remittance for "covers" or "remixes" of someone else's work. Like if you remade Phantom Menace, made Muppets Phantom Menace or novelized it. But what's called fanfic today should be able to be published above board.

DanHulton 3y ago
Sure, but you're not giving enough attention to the fact that this is all happening against the backdrop of capitalism. It's really NICE when stories can be just freely shared and remixed and built from, and we're all richer for that, culturally, sure. But artists and authors and comedians have to earn a living! If we want their output to be free, we can't expect them to also have to pay all for their inputs and, you know, keep making art! If we judge art to have value under capitalism, there NEEDS to be a way of protecting that value for those who create it. Alternatively, we could explore alternatives to this whole capitalism thing, but you can't have your cake and eat it, too.
- Spivak 3y ago
  Right, which is why I'm saying that artists should retain exclusive control of the actual works that they produce and receive mandated royalties from anything that "covers" it (i.e. is substantively the same). Movie adaptations would fall under the category of covers. Where I think it gets murky is when you try to claim ownership over the characters and universe. Because that prevents anyone who's inspired from sharing and selling their work. They either have to come up with their entirely unique OC or do what a lot of authors do which is pick a universe and cast that's in the public domain which is why we get so many greek god adaptations, Camelot, vampires, zombies. The creativity that would flourish if "Harry Potter" could be used with the freedom that people use Count Dracula would be incredible.

by Spivak 3y ago

DanHulton 3y ago

Sure, but you're not giving enough attention to the fact that this is all happening against the backdrop of capitalism. It's really NICE when stories can be just freely shared and remixed and built from, and we're all richer for that, culturally, sure. But artists and authors and comedians have to earn a living! If we want their output to be free, we can't expect them to also have to pay all for their inputs and, you know, keep making art! If we judge art to have value under capitalism, there NEEDS to be a way of protecting that value for those who create it. Alternatively, we could explore alternatives to this whole capitalism thing, but you can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Spivak 3y ago
Right, which is why I'm saying that artists should retain exclusive control of the actual works that they produce and receive mandated royalties from anything that "covers" it (i.e. is substantively the same). Movie adaptations would fall under the category of covers. Where I think it gets murky is when you try to claim ownership over the characters and universe. Because that prevents anyone who's inspired from sharing and selling their work. They either have to come up with their entirely unique OC or do what a lot of authors do which is pick a universe and cast that's in the public domain which is why we get so many greek god adaptations, Camelot, vampires, zombies. The creativity that would flourish if "Harry Potter" could be used with the freedom that people use Count Dracula would be incredible.