3 ms·
Copyright should be commoditized. A possible first step could be giving copyright owners a single obligation: you have to sell what you own. That thing you have
by Mikhail_Edoshin 23d ago
Copyright should be commoditized. A possible first step could be giving copyright owners a single obligation: you have to sell what you own. That thing you have must be available on the market.
This rules out negotiations. They imply a possible negative result, hence the thing is not really available. A public offer, however, is fine.
This thing alone may change the situation quite a bit. Imagine a true market for textbooks or streaming media where every provider has the same selection of titles and has to actually compete.
- saaaaaam 23d agoBut what does “available on the market” mean? Let’s say I own the copyright to something of cultural significance. I make it “available on the market” but at a very high price. Or are you saying that the price would be enforced?
- DrScientist 23d agoWhat happens if I wrote a book - sent around to a few publishers and then personally had a change of heart - perhap it has content which I now disavow. Shouldn't it be within my right to withhold publication? Or because I refuse to publish, but the publishers have a copy - I should lose the right to control my own work and the copyright falls and the publisher can just publish freely?
- dvdkon 23d agoYou could establish contracts with publishers outside of copyright, which is how NDAs work today. It's probably a reasonable thing to do anyway, otherwise there's nothing stopping a publisher from telling everyone the plot summary of your newest novel.
- DrScientist 23d agoBy the same argument, wouldn't all the things you don't like about copyright - like restrictions with what you can do with the thing you have bought - just be put directly into the purchase agreement. Isn't the way to focus on creating consumer protection rights, rather than just leaving it to people with the best legal department and deepest pockets to control the rules?
- dvdkon 23d agoFrom my understanding what's keeping us from this kind of dystopia are restrictions on shrinkwrap agreements, general restrictions on one-sided contracts, and the fact that breach of contract "only" creates civil and not criminal (like copyright) liability.
- DrScientist 23d agoGood point.
- wallst07 23d agoIt seems the consensus in this thread [if I'm skimming correctly] is most want copyright completely removed. So in your hypothetical: you write the book and have a change of heart, I'll just copy it verbatim, slap my name on it and now I'm the author.
- DrScientist 23d ago> It seems the consensus in this thread [if I'm skimming correctly] is most want copyright completely removed. I think there is confusion between copyright and other things around it. For example if I buy a physical book, I own it. I'm free to sell it or give it away. Things like the DMCA and the switch from an ownership model to a rental model are more the problem. ie does getting rid of copyright enable right to repair? Does getting rid of copyright suddenly stop a games company pulling software from your library that you 'bought'? Wouldn't these companies just put all the restrictions directly into the purchase agreement?
- Planktonne 23d ago> A possible first step could be giving copyright owners a single obligation: you have to sell what you own This would be wildly unreasonable and totally unethical. Every picture taken by a photographer has to be available on the market immediately? Think through the ethical implications of that.