Before the internet copyright law mostly concerned businesses and professionals. The law was never designed or intended for the general population. It was supposed to keep businesses from stealing from each other.
Now copyright is everyone's concern, because everyone can copy just by typing CTRL-C and everyone can publish just by clicking "Upload". The current law is completely inadequate for the world we live in.
Good thing for artists there's a lot of rich morons in the world, then. Of course, I wish I had bought Rothko's or Duchamps' works back when they were cheap.
If anyone pays Suicide Girls (EFF) $90 for that image, it'll be because of the value added to it by Richard Prince - not the value added to it by Suicide Girls. So he ultimately did them a favor by appropriating their work and they're capitalizing on that rather than suing.
the thing is, people would still buy Prince's work over yours, because it's his work. He's the one adding value to the image, not the image itself, or who created the image.
The only way to beat him is to sell yours for more than he's selling his.
I agree that this article is rather hysterical, esp. considering the last paragraph of the article:
Three people were killed and more than 260 others wounded in April 2013 when two pressure-cooker bombs were set off near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.
The real question is was the food truck owner compensated for his destroyed property? That's where the true injustice lies.
Even more new works might be created if everything were in the public domain and litigation free.
I don't see how a trademark here is encouraging anything here, and I'm ignoring the fact that the purpose of trademark is not to encourage the creation of new work but to protect consumers from brand confusion.
The estate has simply gotten used to big movie studios paying up to use Sherlock Holmes, and the studios don't question it because paying up for rights is simply how they do business. They can't imagine a world where everyone isn't paying up for the rights to everything ever created, which is why they can't fathom the internet.
But that's how it works. They let you know when your term is over they'll have a cushy job waiting. After that, they'll do whatever they need to do to please you and keep that opportunity open. You might even do the same if your job was always hanging on the next election.
Hollywood, radio, and television were largely in control of the nation's entertainment for more than 100 years before the internet, and that kind of control is not easily let go (not to mention the deep deep pockets of cash that it generated).
They are using their money and influence to stop something that gives everyone the same powers they have enjoyed for a century. The real problem is they didn't grab control of the internet from the start (and they could have through regulations) because the internet was thought of as a communications platform, not an entertainment platform.
It's because Google makes so much more money than they do, and because they think Google is the internet (or that the internet is only used to watch their movies or listen to music). They either want the government to force Google to share its income with them, and/or they want to be able to dictate search results in their favor.
It's not about hate. They simply want money and control.
On the post: Rosie O'Donnell's Ex Accuses Her Of Copyright Infringement... For Posting Photos Of Their Daughter To Instagram
Now copyright is everyone's concern, because everyone can copy just by typing CTRL-C and everyone can publish just by clicking "Upload". The current law is completely inadequate for the world we live in.
On the post: Suicide Girls Reappropriate Art That Appropriation Artist Richard Prince Appropriated -- At A 99.9% Discount
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Suicide Girls Reappropriate Art That Appropriation Artist Richard Prince Appropriated -- At A 99.9% Discount
Re: Re:
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Suicide Girls Reappropriate Art That Appropriation Artist Richard Prince Appropriated -- At A 99.9% Discount
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
Re: Cant they under sell him?
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
Re: Need +1 Meta
The only way to beat him is to sell yours for more than he's selling his.
On the post: Richard Prince Continues To Push The Boundaries Of Copyright Law In Selling Other People's Instagram Selfies
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: An Innocent Pressure Cooker Pays The Price In The War On Terror
Re:
On the post: An Innocent Pressure Cooker Pays The Price In The War On Terror
Re: Not an overreaction...
The real question is was the food truck owner compensated for his destroyed property? That's where the true injustice lies.
On the post: Sherlock Holmes And The Case Of The Never Ending Copyright Dispute
Re: Trademark
I don't see how a trademark here is encouraging anything here, and I'm ignoring the fact that the purpose of trademark is not to encourage the creation of new work but to protect consumers from brand confusion.
The estate has simply gotten used to big movie studios paying up to use Sherlock Holmes, and the studios don't question it because paying up for rights is simply how they do business. They can't imagine a world where everyone isn't paying up for the rights to everything ever created, which is why they can't fathom the internet.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re:
On the post: Godzilla Sues The Godzilla Of Copyright Trolls, Voltage Pictures, For Copyright Infringement
Re:
On the post: Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Insists His Emails With The MPAA Are Super Secret
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Insists His Emails With The MPAA Are Super Secret
Re: Re:
On the post: President Obama Rolls Back Some Police Militarization... Police Flip Out
Re:
On the post: Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Insists His Emails With The MPAA Are Super Secret
Re: Re: Re: Why does Hollywood hate Google?
They are using their money and influence to stop something that gives everyone the same powers they have enjoyed for a century. The real problem is they didn't grab control of the internet from the start (and they could have through regulations) because the internet was thought of as a communications platform, not an entertainment platform.
On the post: 9th Circuit Judge Slams His Colleagues For First Amendment Failings In Waiting So Long To Fix Cindy Garcia Ruling
On the post: Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Insists His Emails With The MPAA Are Super Secret
Re: Why does Hollywood hate Google?
It's not about hate. They simply want money and control.
Next >>