Copywrite laws are they to vague?

[Phoenix-D]

He does have a point. If you, say, eliminate copyright entirely, you get something like so:

Guy makes a web comic, its popular. He isn't getting paid, but he doesn't care because he likes doing it. He has a modest, not huge, readership.

Someone else (with more money) sees this, turns his creation into a huge, over-marketed over commericalized thing. No one will go near the web comic except the original viewers, because they naturally think its a rip off of the over-marketed thing. The over-marketed rip off eventually dies its inevitable death, leaving the first guy with..jack. He gains nothing from the cash grab, and most people have been turned off his comic now too.

I see only a few problems with copyright law, and one of them is a law in general problem.

1. It Lasts too long, and really shouldn't be renewable.

2. Its too expensive to defend yourself from accusations, or go after violators. Smaller Groups HAVE been run into the ground by baseless (but expensive!) lawsuits.

[Pax]

Originally posted by PvK:
it's fundamentally silly and wasteful to not use computers and networks to do what they do with great and natural ease - duplicate and distribute data which, once we get over our ancient and corrupt economic and legal institutions, will allow us to use it to share all data with everyone freely. All that's required is a replacement for the corporate-dominated system of employment and intellectual property ownership, so that creative people can earn a reasonable wage by virtue of how much people appreciate their work, without a corporate monster devouring most of the profit and dictating what everyone creates.

Another thought for you, turning your words above to another concept and end:

it's fundamentally silly and wasteful to not use nuclear armaments and delivery systems to do what they do with great and natural ease - destroy cities and slay millions of innocents which, once we get over our respect for human life, will allow us to use it to obliterate all life on this planet. All that's required is a replacement for the instinctive system of morality, so that psychotic people can kill untold millions of people, without a single shred of guilt.

[ June 23, 2003, 19:06: Message edited by: Pax ]

[Phoenix-D]

Uh, Pax? I think I speak for more than myself when I say:

Where the HELL did that come from?

[Rojero]

Ditto

[Erax]

I think he meant to say that just because we have the technology to do something doesn't mean we should go ahead and use it.

But there are, um, better ways to say it. In fact, I can't think of many worse ways to say it.

Pax, you sometimes come across as... intense. Too intense. Maybe you should reword your example.

[PvK]

Yeah, you could just say that you disagree with the premise that it would be a good thing if everyone could have free access to all content.

I suppose I overstated my cases about megacorporate evil, particularly if you happen to be someone who thinks megacorporations are good. I've just seen plenty of examples, and to me the idea of most of the wealth and power being concentrated in organizations whose stated overriding purpose is to maximize their own wealth in any way they can come up with, satisfies my definition of evil.

I agree there are plenty of people (you used the word "***") who will try to steal other people's work for their own ends. It seems clear to me that megacorporations tend to institutionalize and legalize this behavior, for instance by buying up smaller companies for their intellectual property, and then laying off the staff, destroying their competition at the same time. However I don't agree that the existing copyright system (even with shorter time limits) is the best answer.

PvK

[Pax]

Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
Uh, Pax? I think I speak for more than myself when I say:

Where the HELL did that come from?

It's really very, very, unbelievably simple:

Just because a tool CAN do a thing, does not mean it is wise nor right to actually do that thing with a tool.

Ease of accomplishment is NOT justification for the deed itself.

I chose to illustrate that point in as shockingly glaring a way as I could -- by using PvK's words RE: the ease etc of free sharing of data via computer, only as applies to nuclear munitions. After all, it is about as easy for a nuclear munition (once constructed, ofc) to destroy a city, as it is for a computer to download a few score MB of mp3's.

And would take less time, if you didn't need ot ship the bomb to the target city.