3 ms·

Except, the bag is a star trek replicator. I think that's totally awesome in theory. In practice, I can give away all of the software, music, and artwork that

by tjr 14y ago

Except, the bag is a star trek replicator. I think that's totally awesome in theory. In practice, I can give away all of the software, music, and artwork that I create, because we have "replicators" for it, but it seems that Honda can't replicate me a car and the local contracting company can't replicate me a house. Don't misunderstand me. I really want to give away everything I create for free. I think that would be wonderful. But until and unless the parties that create what I want and need are willing and able to do the same, it kind of puts me in an awkward position. I guess one solution is to work for pay only on things that aren't copyable yet, and consider all things that are copyable to be, by default, of zero monetary value, and if made at all, then made as a charitable gift to society. Is that a good path? (Really asking, not a trick question.)

coldpie 14y ago
>I guess one solution is to work for pay only on things that aren't copyable yet, and consider all things that are copyable to be, by default, of zero monetary value, and if made at all, then made as a charitable gift to society. Is that a good path? This is a really good question and it's been in the back of my head for years. I think reality might force it to be the only tenable position, although one important piece you're missing is the willingness for people to pay you even if they don't have to. I think people recognize that there is value in your product, even if they aren't required to pay for your product to receive it. Many won't, but some will voluntarily pay you to compensate you for the value they received. Advertising is another option. The end result I see is we give up the massive budget productions (AAA movies), and instead receive creative works created by passionate individuals who want to spend their free time (youtube). If I had to choose between that result and destroying Internet and computing freedom, I think I would pick giving up massive productions. I don't know. It's an interesting question, thanks for bringing it up.
belorn 14y ago
Its one way to do it, and I wouldn't mind giving a free beer to those that do when I meet them. Personally, I think there are many ways as a creative person can do to lower or even remove potential harm from copyright. For example, if I were to ask what part of my projects would be potential important for a kid trying to learn, I should be able to identify where copyright might be better removed than enforced. Until society figures out a way to not prevent children and starving people access to knowledge, all I can do is to realize when my work might prevent rather enable and then act. Depending on what ones work is, that can either be very easy thing to follow, or very hard. I hope its not hard, but if it is, I wish you luck :).

by tjr 14y ago

coldpie 14y ago

>I guess one solution is to work for pay only on things that aren't copyable yet, and consider all things that are copyable to be, by default, of zero monetary value, and if made at all, then made as a charitable gift to society. Is that a good path? This is a really good question and it's been in the back of my head for years. I think reality might force it to be the only tenable position, although one important piece you're missing is the willingness for people to pay you even if they don't have to. I think people recognize that there is value in your product, even if they aren't required to pay for your product to receive it. Many won't, but some will voluntarily pay you to compensate you for the value they received. Advertising is another option. The end result I see is we give up the massive budget productions (AAA movies), and instead receive creative works created by passionate individuals who want to spend their free time (youtube). If I had to choose between that result and destroying Internet and computing freedom, I think I would pick giving up massive productions. I don't know. It's an interesting question, thanks for bringing it up.

belorn 14y ago

Its one way to do it, and I wouldn't mind giving a free beer to those that do when I meet them. Personally, I think there are many ways as a creative person can do to lower or even remove potential harm from copyright. For example, if I were to ask what part of my projects would be potential important for a kid trying to learn, I should be able to identify where copyright might be better removed than enforced. Until society figures out a way to not prevent children and starving people access to knowledge, all I can do is to realize when my work might prevent rather enable and then act. Depending on what ones work is, that can either be very easy thing to follow, or very hard. I hope its not hard, but if it is, I wish you luck :).