300
Yet more examples of how copyright destroys culture rather than driving it (walledculture.org)
submitted 2 years ago by [M] to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

One of the clearest demonstrations of how copyright is actively harmful is the lawsuit that four of the biggest publishers brought against the Internet Archive. As a result of the judge’s decision in favour of the publishers – currently being appealed – more than 500,000 books have been taken out of lending by the Internet Archive, including more than 1,300 banned and “challenged” books. In an open letter to the publishers in the lawsuit, the Internet Archive lists three core reasons why removing half a million ebooks is “having a devastating impact in the US and around the world, with far-reaching implications”.

Cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/17259314

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -6 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

So literally every doodle you make and anything you write must be available for purchase? Because you have a copyright on ALL that stuff. Copyrights are automatic.

Your diary? Copyrighted.
Your margin scribbles while you're on the phone? Copyrighted.
That furry midget hentai that you draw for your own "entertainment"? Well, you get the point.

Granted, the copyright system is fucked, but some of the rules exist for good reason, and forcing everyone to release their copyrights if they won't sell their art is ridiculous. I will certainly agree that the copyright/trademark systems badly need an overhaul.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You completly misunderstood what you are replying to. They are not saying you have to release anything, just that if you don't, others should be able to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    If you don’t actually offer content you have the copyright for them you shouldn’t be allowed to prevent people from distributing it as abandonware.

    That's what I'm replying to. You have the copyright for everything you create. If you don't put it up for sale, they're saying everyone should be allowed to distribute it. That's kind of fucked.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I fail to see what's wrong with that. If you aren't intending to sell it, then it's just hoarding. The only exception I can think of is something you've made but haven't put on the market yet, and an "incomplete and under active development" clause could easily take care of that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago*

    So you spent 10 years on a personal song about your family dying around you, it's very personal, heartfelt and could be extremely successful because it's said in a way that people won't at first understand. You play it for your friends and they absolutely love it and encourage you to put it out. You don't want to because it hurts too much. So you think everyone else has the "right"s to that song because it's hoarding if you don't release it? Come on, you don't own my thoughts and creations, it's selfish, greedy and a little narcissistic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago*

    The comment I made on reply to another comment hits here as well

    We can think of weird edge cases all day, the fact is companies shouldn't be able to hoard IP.

    For fuck's sake though, talk about strawman arguments. "Literally every doodle you make" when we're talking about abandonware. My eyes nearly rolled out of my fucking head reading that. Do I need to start putting disclaimers on every post I make? "I am aware there is more nuance required before a law gets suggested but I sure wish companies couldn't hoard old media without making it available, please don't 'um, actually' me by suggesting I'm implying everyone must give me copies of their personal shopping lists."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    All the examples you have brought forward apply to private individuals. This is about cooperations and companies. Those very different legal entities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    All the examples you have brought forward apply to private individuals. This is about cooperations and companies. Those very different legal entities.

    That is not what some people here are saying, they want everything put out for copyright to be public domain. What's hilarious is, that's exactly what the AI hoovers want, they want everything anyone else makes. Especially the unique and creative artists. So these people in this thread want the same thing as these huge corporations everyone here hates.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent