Ad Age Explains How Copyright Is The Buggy Whip Of The Digital Age
from the time-to-move-on dept
Michael Scott points us to a rather surprising (given the source) piece in Ad Age asking if copyright is "the buggy whip of the digital age." Of course, most regular Techdirt readers will not be surprised to find that I agree with that statement wholeheartedly. It's a tool for a very different system that isn't needed. If anything, I'd argue the situation is worse than with buggy whips. At least with buggy whips, they could just fade away as the automobile grew in importance. Buggy whips couldn't get in the way of the automakers. Copyright, on the other hand, is regularly used to stifle and hold back new forms of creativity and to silence expression.The article itself, by Judy Shapiro, is really a conference report from an event called "The Collision of Ideas 2010," put on by the Copyright Clearance Center. It looks like they brought in a lot of fantastic speakers, highlighting how copyright law doesn't fit well with what content creators are trying to do, and how it's often being used to actively harm content creators. For example:
Mr. Hoffman, the filmmaker, gave a presentation where he confided how challenging current copyright laws are for artists. As an example, he gave us detailed insights into the challenges he had creating his critically acclaimed Sputnik documentary. He explained that half his budget was spent on copyright fees alone. Most unfairly, he had to pay exorbitant copyright fees to a network for old news footage they did not even have but which David himself had spent time to ferret out. David openly concluded that, "it was better to open the floodgates" and let anyone use his content than constrain its distribution.Unfortunately, Shapiro is getting beaten up in the comments on that piece by folks who are doing the kneejerk thing of saying "but copyright is good, because otherwise who will create!" Still, it's good to see that this debate is reaching a wider and wider audience through conferences like this one and in the pages of AdAge. While you can always expect the kneejerk response from folks who have always been told that copyright must be good, the more people examine the actual issues, the more they'll recognize that as a tool, it's current design is woefully misguided and very much against the principles for which it was created.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: buggy whip, copyright
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
UK network E4 makes Something "Amazinger"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuA_5ApLD9U
Could you imagine a product that someone made something amazinger could be sued?
Silly world we live in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Indeed, many new ideas covered by patent, copyright and trademark should be regurgitated and seen as such: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuA_5ApLD9U Could you imagine a product that someone made something amazinger could be sued? Silly world we live i
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuA_5ApLD9U
Could you imagine a product that someone made something amazinger could be sued?
Silly world we live in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
seriously use canada
make copyrights 30 years even
i know an idea id love to try but cant afford the fees
what you bet i could make money from an idea OR at best lesson the tax burden tha people are payng fo rme to live on disability
YOU do this and more disabled and poor will create wealth all on there own
stay greedy america cause this WILL NOT WORK. OBAMAWOOD is great at speeches and propaganda. WHAT he fails at is the reality hes inherited the BUSH train wreck created by the worlds most greedy two term president in world history.
and how about that stat trek in the prekining
wasnt bad and i know i could do a hell of a lot better if i had ability too , ALL by myself with maybe 3 people or 4
and a tiny mask budget and makeup and i mean TINY.
THIS is who will create and we'll get better at it.
AND i dont need 20 million per actor either
i dont require unions
i dont require stunt men
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: seriously use canada
Why not have a copyright moratorium week?
(Maybe even day at first)
Let's have a week every year where anything published or broadcast goes straight into the public domain.
We'd soon find out if the claims of the copyright advocates about needing copyright to encourage creativity are really true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes people should be compensated fairly for their creative endeavours but as is sooooo apparent the current system is just not up to demands of the 21st Century.
Hopefully as more and more attention is brought to this some change can be made to simplify the system and benefit both content creators and the end user.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
format shifting
if i have it on vhs i might by it on dvd but only because of the special features, and other extras and even then if you think im buying it new from the studio you're insane
$30??!
hell no
15 if that from a third party seller on amazon or something
and if i have it on cassette ill spend $30 buy a usb tape drive and rip it.
i will pay for value added content like all the extra stuff on a dvd besides the movie/ tv season
but i will not pay for a new format
if thats all im buying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Stop talking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i dont think this is ad age saying this just a guest columnist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Am I the only one here? I don't disagree with Mike, but it just seems there's other problems. I am really confused.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tango Delta Company....Fall In!
What an beautifully subtle call to commenting arms :)
Mike Masnick's army of hacker raporist grandma lickers to the rescue!
Seriously, though, before I go join the front lines at that article's comments....can we call ourselves Tango Delta Company? That just sounds cool....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tango Delta Company....Fall In!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Tango Delta Company....Fall In!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WTF
The more I hear arguments on this topic, the more it seems clear that its not so much the content creators that have a problem with file sharing or copyright laws, but rather the people who get paid from what the content creators create.
I can't really blame them though. If I was getting paid for the work that someone else was doing, I would fight for that compensation too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
loved this comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The public domain is the rule and copyright is the exception.
The length of copyright lasts way too long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i have to laugh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm assuming this footage he wanted to use for his Sputnick piece cost money to produce. And we're talking old school production with real film and a real crew with real costs, not youtube pinheads tossing ping-pong balls around.
It sounds like he's simply a scrounger wanting to make money off of other people's efforts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you want more money, do more work.
If you don't do more work, you don't get more money.
Reusing old footage requires no work from *anyone* involved in said footage, yet they deserve more money?
Logic fail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Some of the footage was taken from YouTube but he made the mistake of trying to track down the original rights holders who didn't even know that the footage was theirs until he told them it might be. They consulted their lawyers and what do you know, that will be $10,000 licensing fee for our old black and white footage about the space race back in the 1950s.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know who WON'T create...
"He explained that half his budget was spent on copyright fees alone. Most unfairly, he had to pay exorbitant copyright fees to a network for old news footage they did not even have but which David himself had spent time to ferret out."
Anyone who can't afford or is to lazy to go through that much hassle. I can't understand how, with a direct quote from a mouth of experience, people can still claim that no one would create without copyright. There would likely be more, and it would likely be better, without.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My suggestions:
1) Shutdown public libraries.
2) Shutdown used book stores.
3) People should pay $1.00 per page for any book they read in a bookstore.
4) Outlaw lending a book to someone else.
5) Shutdown the entire Internet since the Internet is nothing but piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It depends which point of view you are looking at it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The question is how to do it without making everyone go through technical hoops. Copyright was good in its day -- but it does not mean that's the only way to do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copy right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]