3 ms·
Well, it mostly just helps when someone says, "Well, if you'd ever created anything, you'd understand!" or "Well, if you were a writer|artist|filmmaker|programm
by randallsquared 18y ago
Well, it mostly just helps when someone says, "Well, if you'd ever created anything, you'd understand!" or "Well, if you were a writer|artist|filmmaker|programmer, you'd understand!"
That is, I only seriously bring it out when someone explains with a pat on the head that when I grow up and start actually creating stuff, my views on copyright and patents will suddenly change and I'll be in favor of them.
- xenophanes 18y agoI don't think it's worth one's time to prepare strategies for how to deal with invalid arguments that would only be raised by people who aren't going to listen in any case (they either not seriously trying, or very stupid, or very ignorant of what constitutes a good or bad argument).
- randallsquared 18y agoOh, I didn't prepare it ahead of time; that's the most basic argument many people have, and I've heard it over and over since I first came to this viewpoint ~20 years ago.
- graemep 18y agoWell, it has not changed my views (admittedly I am not entirely anti-copyright, only against current laws). Anyway, why should someone's view be more valid because they have a vested interest? I do find plagiarism and copying that is not properly attributed, or that is not necessary very annoying. Why do people copy and paste text from my website to Wikipedia, Scribd and other places? Why not just link? Why not attribute properly. Most sites are pretty good at dealing with this - A Wikipedia editor spotted it a copy and paste and took down the content before I got round to complaining, but Scribd seems to go out of its way to make it as difficult as possible (written DMCA notices only).