3 ms·
i don't know much about this specific archive, but in my opinion, this kind of action should be considered criminal damage to human cultural heritage. you shoul
by exe34 2y ago
i don't know much about this specific archive, but in my opinion, this kind of action should be considered criminal damage to human cultural heritage. you shouldn't have to pay to store it yourself, but you should then have to make sure somebody else gets a chance to pay for a copy.
I've seen some YouTube creators delete their past videos when they transition. i understand the desire to distance themselves from their past persona, but again, the content itself doesn't belong to just them anymore - they should be able to profit from it if they want, but they shouldn't be able to destroy it.
- cwillu 2y agoI'd argue that once you've profited from it, that's a bright line that it's no longer purely yours to dispose of as you see fit.
- autoexec 2y agoI think an "easy" way to manage this would be to require people to submit a DRM free copy of any work they want copyright protections on to the United States Copyright Office who will keep a record of when copyright was applied, contact info for who to reach if you want to negotiate rights for using the work while copyright protections are in effect, a countdown timer showing how long until copyright expires, and once expired a download link for the work available to anyone at any time going forward. It would mean that people's work wouldn't enjoy copyright protection (or at least not full protections) unless they give all that info to the copyright office, but I think that's a minor trade off for what would quickly become a vast repository of public domain works.