Apparently some silly USians want to extend copyright again: https://boingboing.net/2018/05/18/orrin-fucking-hatch.html
Repeating my Twitter reaction:
When will musicians realize that their biggest competitor is ALL THE PAST RECORDINGS EVER and revolt against this madness?
The Internet is not what makes music hard work. Never was! It's competing with Elvis & Mozart.
Demand the right to build on the past, not compete with it.
@HerraBRE At some point we need to point out that if the law keeps getting extended and Mickey Mouse never falls into the public domain, copyright as Congress defines it is no longer limited in extend and therefore falls outside the authority the Constitution gives it to grant copyright for a LIMITED period.
@seanl Probably true.
But that's a largely U.S. specific argument which is only a weak defense anyway.
I can't bring myself to get excited about fighting over crumbs.
@HerraBRE @clacke @seanl actually we should abolish private property entirely, in all its forms, but especially "intellectual" -- the particulars of which depend on the *discovery* of information and not the *creation* of it (as no information can be created or destroyed, it is infinitely transmissible and therefore not subject to any natural law of scarcity)
insofar as (c) continues to exist, anything more than 10 years is altogether too obscene.
I think there probably needs to be some kind of private property though we might be able to agree on something you might not consider to be private property. The only form of IP I think had any business existing is trademarks, but those are covered by prohibitions against fraud.
@trwnh @HerraBRE @clacke
I think the main reason to have some kind of private property is that there is always a trivial way to privatize any shared resource, and that's to kill everyone who contests your claim. Since we don't want that to happen, we provide a way to do it that doesn't involve killing.
@trwnh @HerraBRE @clacke I'm not opposed to this idea in the abstract, but I don't understand how to concretely apply it. Say, for example, I leave for work in the morning, then come home to find someone else has moved into my house. Since they are now using it, does that make it their house? If they do damage to it, who's responsible for fixing it? What constitutes damage versus normal wear and tear in that case?
@seanl occupying a house for less than 8 hours doesn't really qualify as usage, though
So how many hours are required?
@seanl it's not really about the time spent. it's more about who is using something more, or more importantly. e.g. you live in a house, and you live in one house at a time, your stuff is there, you personal belongings are there, etc etc.
Generalistic and moderated instance. All opinions are welcome, but hate speeches are prohibited. Users who don't respect rules will be silenced or suspended, depending on the violation severity.