FBXL Social

@cy I've always said that there is an argument for a limited Monopoly for a short period of time to ensure that artists have the ability to profit off their works. The idea that this limited time would be multiple lifetimes is absurd. I thought about issuing a revision to the graysonian ethic that releases the contents of the book into the public domain after 20 years or something. If I haven't made my money back by then, there's no further purpose to hold on to it.

@cy there's also a name for getting control of a person for a period of time in exchange for money: it's called a job, and it also sucks but it's a necessary evil for the world to work.

@Hyolobrika @cy Given the scale of things that need to be, I think it is necessary.

Perhaps there could be an argument made that many of the things that are jobs don't need to be jobs (I think it used to be that something like 80% of people used to be self-employed and now it's more like 20%), but there are important things where you just need to hire a person to do a thing and to spend the time and get good at it, and then keep doing it afterwards as part of an organization.

@cy That's true, but there are ways other than laws to remove your ability to copy things -- Foremost among them being not creating things in the first place, but it can also include not making things that were created available to the public, or outside of a strict NDA.

Ideally, copyrights and patents are a trade-off. In exchange for a temporary monopoly, you provide your creative work or invention to the world. In the ideal, it's win/win. The author or inventor gets to make money off of their work selling it in a protected manner, and the world gets use of the work after that period of monopoly has expired. The problems start when the monopolies become effectively unlimited. For copyrights, that means with terms far longer than a human lifetime. For patents, it's playing games patenting things that already exist, or playing games patenting almost the same thing changed just enough that the new patent covers the old invention.

@cy They certainly can stop making their works available to the public. We've had ages where that was the case, or where knowledge was stratified into being part of social classes there was little mobility into.

You might be correct about the right being granted to the publisher. That seems like a good reason to change that, and leave it with the author. Perhaps even make it non-transferrable.

@cy You sure it wasn't stratified by the guilds and churches that jealously hid their secrets from people who weren't part of the club?

A lot of the 3d printing hobby comes from patents that have expired. There's a lot of other technologies that are instead covered by trade secrets or NDAs and so weren't provided to the public. There's a good example of IP improving the amount of information available to the public and how you could just end up never having that information if you don't have a working IP system.

@cy You think that the only way secrets can be kept is via the military?

@Hyolobrika @icedquinn @cy Is CC actually anti-copyright?

Releasing work into the public domain would be anti copyright, but using copyright to dictate how your work is used using CC licensing seems pro-copyright to me.

@Hyolobrika @icedquinn @cy Sure you do. You get the ability to dictate how the final product is used under license. The fact that you're giving up some but not all rights doesn't make that anti-copyright, it means you're getting to choose how your works are used, and how they are not used, and under which circumstances.
replies
0
announces
0
likes
0

@Hyolobrika @icedquinn @cy When you try to follow copyright law correctly and utilize only pd assets, you quickly realize there isn't as much as you'd think.

You also start to realize the evil of the copyright lobby, that through lobbying they've managed to steal all culture going back to the invention of recording devices.

this is the first year ever that some audio recordings naturally entered the public domain, and that's only because of some legislation that forced it.

@colinsmatt11 @icedquinn @Hyolobrika @cy Is that true?? What happens when a copyrighted work leaves the protection period of copyright?

@icedquinn @colinsmatt11 @Hyolobrika @cy That's entirely possible, I don't know.