4 ms·

> I think that the very idea behind IP laws in the first place was to protect effort No, this is know as a "sweat of the brow" interpretation and has been reje

> I think that the very idea behind IP laws in the first place was to protect effort No, this is know as a "sweat of the brow" interpretation and has been rejected by the US Supreme Court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow Just because something takes effort does not mean it should be protected. Just because a person could make more money by having exclusivity does not mean that thing should be protected. I haven't thought about the issue of magic tricks enough to know what I think about it, but I definitely resist the notion that something should be protected simply because it took work to create. That way leads to a society where everything is pay-per-view. For example, just because I scan an old book doesn't mean I should own a copyright on the scan.

eli 14y ago
For example, just because I scan an old book doesn't mean I should own a copyright on the scan. Just to play devils advocate, why not? Wouldn't that result in many more old books being scanned that otherwise wouldn't be? Wouldn't competition force down the price of the popular old books?
- lmm 14y ago
  That's a backwards way to look at it. Copyright is a very powerful protection, we sacrifice a lot for it (look at all the creativity that's still going on around Sherlock Holmes, or in illegal fanfiction for more recent works, and think how much more creative expression there might be if more cultural icons were without copyright). The bar to justify extending copyright to something new should be set high; I'd rather risk having fewer old books scanned than have someone unable to make a new creative work because he'd got the idea from a scan of an old book that turned out to be copyrighted.
  - gyom 14y ago
    Just think about how George Lucas clearly wasn't the best person to write the Star Wars prequels. I would gladly pay for a well-written IP-infringing new version of Matrix 2-3 instead of the official crap that the rights owners put out.

eli 14y ago

For example, just because I scan an old book doesn't mean I should own a copyright on the scan. Just to play devils advocate, why not? Wouldn't that result in many more old books being scanned that otherwise wouldn't be? Wouldn't competition force down the price of the popular old books?

lmm 14y ago
That's a backwards way to look at it. Copyright is a very powerful protection, we sacrifice a lot for it (look at all the creativity that's still going on around Sherlock Holmes, or in illegal fanfiction for more recent works, and think how much more creative expression there might be if more cultural icons were without copyright). The bar to justify extending copyright to something new should be set high; I'd rather risk having fewer old books scanned than have someone unable to make a new creative work because he'd got the idea from a scan of an old book that turned out to be copyrighted.
- gyom 14y ago
  Just think about how George Lucas clearly wasn't the best person to write the Star Wars prequels. I would gladly pay for a well-written IP-infringing new version of Matrix 2-3 instead of the official crap that the rights owners put out.