4 ms·
> doing further damage to the creative commons Not sure I understand this part. Because creators would be getting paid for their works being used for someone e
by mcmcmc 2y ago
> doing further damage to the creative commons
Not sure I understand this part. Because creators would be getting paid for their works being used for someone else’s commercial gain?
- chrisweekly 2y agoBecause it reinforces the idea that creative works should usually involve lawyers.
- mcmcmc 2y agoNo it doesn’t. It reinforces that copyright is the law. If you don’t violate someone’s copyright, you don’t need a lawyer.