4 ms·

I assume it's one of those things where a few corpos just outplayed 99% of the population "The key element of social control is the strategy of distraction tha

I assume it's one of those things where a few corpos just outplayed 99% of the population "The key element of social control is the strategy of distraction that is to divert public attention from important issues and changes decided by political and economic elites" -Chomsky

kiba 2y ago
Everyone believe they need copyright, therefore it is the status quo.
- Teever 2y ago
  Does everyone believe that we need copyright to be the exact way that it is though? I'm pretty sure that the reason that copyright laws are the way they are is because certain industries in the US lobby the government to strong arm other countries into adopting onerous copyright restrictions as part of free trade agreements. Whatever you feel about the merits of intellectual property laws the idea that they're wrapped up as 'free trade' when they in fact make things that would otherwise be free cost money is downright Orwellian. Maybe countries that don't really have a film or tv industry don't want to see copyright on those products and why would they? Why would they want to see their citizens paying American countries for something that would otherwise be free?
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    I'm fine going back to the old 14+14 rules copyright originally. having your creation for an entire generation seems appropriate. But opinions are all across the spectrum on this issue. I think the primary reason the "spirit" of current copyright broke down is because it's been reduced to hoarding over protecting. the idea is that I can license out an idea if I really want to make use of it. So creations flow and the company makes their own cut out of it. But I can't just walk up to Disney and pay 100 dollars ,1000, maybe even 1 million to grab Mickey Mouse and work with something. Depending on their products, they may not want anyone using Mickey period, even if there is no mickey product cycle. You basically need to be EA or Mattel or Warner Bros. to even begin being considered for such a thing. That's their right but it spoils the social contract. When everything by default is locked down, there is no creation flowing. Just broken dreams for abandoned franchises everyone else would love to make use of.
- t-writescode 2y ago
  It’s a reasonable stance to want copyright. It’s an anti-consumer stance to force copyright to nearly 100 years and allow no format swapping under a hilariously broad set of normal transmission and format-swapping techniques.
- BadHumans 2y ago
  No one has put forth a good argument about why I don't need copyright.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    There's definitely tiers of copyright to consider, which is part of the divisiveness on the issue. You wanting to protect your creation and get compensated for its IP for 10-20 years (so, a good portion of your life career) is very different from Disney wanting to delay Mickey mouse going into public domain. an IP its creator and studio already reaped trillions from over the century.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    No one should have to. If we're talking about putting/maintaining restrictions on people, the onus should be on the proponents to put forth a good argument why we need it.
    - BadHumans 2y ago
      Not when you are the one trying to change the status quo. Regardless of what you believe, if you want to change the default you need to explain to people why it should change. A self-righteous stance like yours will change nothing.
      - twothreeone 2y ago
        Well the argument is that the status quo is bad for all but a select few, so moving past it would be beneficial for basically nearly everybody. Rent seeking limits innovation, needlessly drives up costs, creates barriers where there shouldn't be any, encourages predatory economic behaviors, suppresses competition, and ultimately leads to monopolistic and or oligopolic wealth and power structures. It's universally bad practice that results in bad outcomes for society and we should move away from enabling and indeed incentivizing that kind of economic behavior.

kiba 2y ago

Everyone believe they need copyright, therefore it is the status quo.

Teever 2y ago
Does everyone believe that we need copyright to be the exact way that it is though? I'm pretty sure that the reason that copyright laws are the way they are is because certain industries in the US lobby the government to strong arm other countries into adopting onerous copyright restrictions as part of free trade agreements. Whatever you feel about the merits of intellectual property laws the idea that they're wrapped up as 'free trade' when they in fact make things that would otherwise be free cost money is downright Orwellian. Maybe countries that don't really have a film or tv industry don't want to see copyright on those products and why would they? Why would they want to see their citizens paying American countries for something that would otherwise be free?
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  I'm fine going back to the old 14+14 rules copyright originally. having your creation for an entire generation seems appropriate. But opinions are all across the spectrum on this issue. I think the primary reason the "spirit" of current copyright broke down is because it's been reduced to hoarding over protecting. the idea is that I can license out an idea if I really want to make use of it. So creations flow and the company makes their own cut out of it. But I can't just walk up to Disney and pay 100 dollars ,1000, maybe even 1 million to grab Mickey Mouse and work with something. Depending on their products, they may not want anyone using Mickey period, even if there is no mickey product cycle. You basically need to be EA or Mattel or Warner Bros. to even begin being considered for such a thing. That's their right but it spoils the social contract. When everything by default is locked down, there is no creation flowing. Just broken dreams for abandoned franchises everyone else would love to make use of.
t-writescode 2y ago
It’s a reasonable stance to want copyright. It’s an anti-consumer stance to force copyright to nearly 100 years and allow no format swapping under a hilariously broad set of normal transmission and format-swapping techniques.
BadHumans 2y ago
No one has put forth a good argument about why I don't need copyright.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  There's definitely tiers of copyright to consider, which is part of the divisiveness on the issue. You wanting to protect your creation and get compensated for its IP for 10-20 years (so, a good portion of your life career) is very different from Disney wanting to delay Mickey mouse going into public domain. an IP its creator and studio already reaped trillions from over the century.
- kelnos 2y ago
  No one should have to. If we're talking about putting/maintaining restrictions on people, the onus should be on the proponents to put forth a good argument why we need it.
  - BadHumans 2y ago
    Not when you are the one trying to change the status quo. Regardless of what you believe, if you want to change the default you need to explain to people why it should change. A self-righteous stance like yours will change nothing.
    - twothreeone 2y ago
      Well the argument is that the status quo is bad for all but a select few, so moving past it would be beneficial for basically nearly everybody. Rent seeking limits innovation, needlessly drives up costs, creates barriers where there shouldn't be any, encourages predatory economic behaviors, suppresses competition, and ultimately leads to monopolistic and or oligopolic wealth and power structures. It's universally bad practice that results in bad outcomes for society and we should move away from enabling and indeed incentivizing that kind of economic behavior.