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.
You know, not all musicians are completely ignorant of that.
Some of us even studied economics.
Some of us even think the current so-called Intellectual Property (which is neither intellectual, nor property) regime is stupid.
This has more to do with politicians and rent-seeking behaviour.
Here's a few old texts of mine on the subject, too. Not even close to being in the same league as Cory's writing, obviously, but contain a lot of sources:
There are many problems in the arts world that make it hard for people to demand a decent wage. I am aware of this, which is why I concede that some form of limited copyright is even worth considering.
But once that wage has been earned, I don't see any ethical argument for continued payments, let alone restrictions on the thoughts and creativity of others.
Acting as if society will suddenly become devoid of creative works if we abolish copyright flies in the face of reality. It's just not true, never has been and never will be.
The problem that needs solving, is to fairly compensate people for their work - and maximize the benefit to society.
Copyright does a crap job of both. Reform it! 😁
@techbolt @jankoekepan @rysiek If I were Emperor Of The Planet, there'd be Universal Basic Income, no copyright at all, but correct attribution would be required and creatives would be granted a limited (maybe 10 year or so) right-to-veto derivative works out of respect to their artistic vision.
Something like that.
I'm not Emperor. 👑
I also want to say, that even though I have a vision for how I feel things should be, I don't expect we can get there in one step. That would be unfair to people who have built their lives around the current system.
But we can't even make minor improvements if people are unwilling to at least think about alternatives.
There are other positions to consider. The way that copyrights are written right now, they constitute a limitation on your own brain, to the point that they constrain artists, rather than liberate them (check out the lawsuits like the Marvin Gaye estate/family's case).
Once enough of the culture is locked down, every artist (and engineer, and designer) is straitjacketed forever.
If I were not motivated by money, why would "perpetual monetary returns" be a good idea?
However you cut it "perpetual monetary returns" do not make sense.
We're talking still receiving payments on something you did 20, 30, 50 years ago. I do not see how this makes sense. Especially that for the most popular works it's not the authors who are receiving the payments! It's corporate owners.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!