Copyright isn't property or a right. It is a privileged granted by the government. Copying is a right - something people do naturally and have done since the dawn of time - and copyright law is an infringement of that right.
They actually did make self-destructing DVDs at one time. It wasn't a hit.
But the whole idea behind streaming is getting streaming companies to pay annual licensing fees - which is the same as getting people to buy the same content over and over.
I love the idea of banning the offended rather than the offender.
And for what it's worth, Gollum isn't a bad character. He's a great character. And any evil he does is because he's been corrupted by the ring. The ring is bad. Gollum is not.
All of those things are illegal, so if anything legalizing prostitution (where the government can actually regulate it rather than prosecute it) might do a lot more to reduce kidnapping, trafficking, blackmail, and illegal immigration.
You have to throw in a few seconds near the beginning of some half dressed person just to keep them on their toes - something that would get missed if you fast forward, which is exactly what they'll do. Audio's a good idea too, since they have to listen for something objectionable.
Almost all modern entertainment media is locked down by copyright, so there's no way to gauge what culture might be like if a significant portion of it were public domain. Books are an exception because there's a significant number of public domain works that are still widely popular - so it makes sense to study copyright's effects on culture through books. I suppose you could also look at the still thriving market for classical music, where the vast majority of work they perform is pre-copyright.
If copyright terms had not been retroactively extended, there would be a significant body of 20th century films and sound recordings in the public domain to make a comparative study. Unfortunately, we may see the 20th century fall into the public domain until the 22nd century.
You praise all the progress of the 20th century but who's to say that progress wouldn't have been improved if things were different? For one thing, maybe a handful of multi-national corporations wouldn't own the vast majority of our culture, and maybe more than just the most economically viable material would still be available to us.
Since the internet became mainstream we've learned that there's a vast amount of culture that was being filtered out of the corporate system that existed before. The 20th century method of big companies controlling popular culture probably wasn't the best system - it was just the most efficient at the time. It hinged on controlling access to mass production and distribution.
The internet gives creators access to these things that before they could only get by giving up their copyright and control to a handful of major players if they wanted to participate in mass culture.
On the post: The Two Leading Presidential Candidates -- Clinton And Trump -- Are Both Mocking Free Speech On The Internet
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Senator Mitch McConnell To Obama: Please, Just Tell Us What Law You Need To Ban Encryption And You'll Get It
Re:
On the post: No Matter What You Think Of Gun Control, Relying On The No Fly List For Anything Is Monumentally Stupid
Re: Another Probem With The Idea...
On the post: The Selfie Monkey Strikes Back: Lawyers Claim Of Course Monkeys Can Sue For Copyright
Re: PETA Suit
On the post: The Selfie Monkey Strikes Back: Lawyers Claim Of Course Monkeys Can Sue For Copyright
Re: Ownership
On the post: DEA Seized $262k From Sexting Extortioners And Now The Oldest Private College In West Virginia Wants Its Money Back
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Congress Still Fighting SEC's Investigation Of Alleged Insider Trading By Its Members
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Congress Still Fighting SEC's Investigation Of Alleged Insider Trading By Its Members
Re: Re:
On the post: What Did The UK Accomplish In Revoking The Right To Rip CDs After Just One Year... Other Than Greater Disrespect For Copyright?
Re: Re:
But the whole idea behind streaming is getting streaming companies to pay annual licensing fees - which is the same as getting people to buy the same content over and over.
On the post: Turkish Court Establishes A Special 'Expert Panel' To Determine If Comparing Prime Minister To Gollum Is An Insult
And for what it's worth, Gollum isn't a bad character. He's a great character. And any evil he does is because he's been corrupted by the ring. The ring is bad. Gollum is not.
On the post: What Did The UK Accomplish In Revoking The Right To Rip CDs After Just One Year... Other Than Greater Disrespect For Copyright?
Re: Re: Re: How exactly is the benefiting the public again
On the post: What Did The UK Accomplish In Revoking The Right To Rip CDs After Just One Year... Other Than Greater Disrespect For Copyright?
Re: How exactly is the benefiting the public again
On the post: Open Insulin Project Could Help Save Thousands Of Lives And Billions Of Dollars
Re:
On the post: L.A. Politician Proposes Bold Plan To Wreck Homes, Destroy Lives And Abuse License Plate Reader Technology
Re: Re:
On the post: Sixth Circuit Appeals Court Prepares To Consider The Privacy Implications Of Mugshots
Re:
On the post: DOJ Says Body Camera-Wearing Cops Aren't Allowed To Partner Up With Federal Agencies
Re: Re:
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Let's Bore The Censors
On the post: DOJ Says Body Camera-Wearing Cops Aren't Allowed To Partner Up With Federal Agencies
On the post: More Evidence Of How Copyright Makes Culture Disappear In A Giant Black Hole
Re: Re: Re: Copyright panic attack.
If copyright terms had not been retroactively extended, there would be a significant body of 20th century films and sound recordings in the public domain to make a comparative study. Unfortunately, we may see the 20th century fall into the public domain until the 22nd century.
You praise all the progress of the 20th century but who's to say that progress wouldn't have been improved if things were different? For one thing, maybe a handful of multi-national corporations wouldn't own the vast majority of our culture, and maybe more than just the most economically viable material would still be available to us.
Since the internet became mainstream we've learned that there's a vast amount of culture that was being filtered out of the corporate system that existed before. The 20th century method of big companies controlling popular culture probably wasn't the best system - it was just the most efficient at the time. It hinged on controlling access to mass production and distribution.
The internet gives creators access to these things that before they could only get by giving up their copyright and control to a handful of major players if they wanted to participate in mass culture.
On the post: TV Industry Starts Running Fewer Ads To Combat Netflix, Cord Cutting
Re: It's not just the ads, it's the BUGs
Next >>