4 ms·

>I guess I just come at this from a different angle. I never really felt that I was entitled to media that I didn't produce myself. I never felt that an organi

>I guess I just come at this from a different angle. I never really felt that I was entitled to media that I didn't produce myself. I never felt that an organization had the right to prevent me from accessing a piece of our culture because they have a piece of paper. Copyright as it exists today transfers ownership of culture from artists to corporation; subsequent bartering of ownership means that the price _you_ want to pay goes nowhere near those what made it. It is a travesty that Apple was _bragging_ that the Beatles music was in the iTunes store, as if that was some accomplishment of openness instead of lawyerly bickering. Which is all to say: it isn't the paying for it that makes people oppose copyright. It's who we'd have to pay.

chimi 14y ago
It's a travesty that consumers still think producers must relinquish all rights to income post-digitization. You don't have a "right" to culture. If it weren't for the risk and expense of marketing the corporations invest in the success of the music, you probably wouldn't have ever heard of the music to download it. I am glad the courts have consistently ruled in favor of the producers over the privileged consumer class. We need more creativity and production. Production should be rewarded.
gavinlynch 14y ago
>> "I never felt that an organization had the right to prevent me from accessing a piece of our culture because they have a piece of paper." All paintings, music, theater, opera, digital photographs, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera: So this is all free then? Sounds good to me. I mean, if you're telling me I'm entitled to all of this, I guess that's pretty cool. Not sure my friends who went to film school will like not having jobs, but if that's what the world owes me... too bad for them. >> "Which is all to say: it isn't the paying for it that makes people oppose copyright. It's who we'd have to pay." You don't like music executives. I don't like banks. But if I want to buy a house I'm going to have to go through one in all likelihood. Because I hate bankers, that does not entitle me to a free house. And what do you do professionally? What if a large part of the country decided they don't like your industry, and that you shouldn't be paid for any of your services or goods?

chimi 14y ago

It's a travesty that consumers still think producers must relinquish all rights to income post-digitization. You don't have a "right" to culture. If it weren't for the risk and expense of marketing the corporations invest in the success of the music, you probably wouldn't have ever heard of the music to download it. I am glad the courts have consistently ruled in favor of the producers over the privileged consumer class. We need more creativity and production. Production should be rewarded.

gavinlynch 14y ago

>> "I never felt that an organization had the right to prevent me from accessing a piece of our culture because they have a piece of paper." All paintings, music, theater, opera, digital photographs, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera: So this is all free then? Sounds good to me. I mean, if you're telling me I'm entitled to all of this, I guess that's pretty cool. Not sure my friends who went to film school will like not having jobs, but if that's what the world owes me... too bad for them. >> "Which is all to say: it isn't the paying for it that makes people oppose copyright. It's who we'd have to pay." You don't like music executives. I don't like banks. But if I want to buy a house I'm going to have to go through one in all likelihood. Because I hate bankers, that does not entitle me to a free house. And what do you do professionally? What if a large part of the country decided they don't like your industry, and that you shouldn't be paid for any of your services or goods?