Pluralistic: “If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing” (08 Dec 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
pluralistic.net

The ability to change features, prices, and availability of things you’ve already paid for is a powerful temptation to corporations.

  • merc@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    23·
    11 months ago

    Intellectual property is not a thought that you own. It’s an idea

    Ah, it’s an idea, not a thought. Gotcha. Glad you cleared that up.

    Something that actually takes time to make, often a whole lot of time.

    Who the fuck cares? Dinner also takes a great deal of time to make.

    Something you never would have dedicated as much time to if you couldn’t be compensated for it.

    That’s not true. People have been telling stories and creating art since humanity climbed down from the trees. Compensation might encourage more people to do it, but there was never a time that people weren’t creating, regardless of compensation. In addition, copyright, patents and trademarks are only one way of trying to get compensation. The Sistine chapel ceiling was painted not by an artist who was protected by copyright, but by an artist who had rich patrons who paid him to work.

    Maybe “Meg 2: The Trench” wouldn’t have been made unless Warner Brothers knew it would be protected by copyright until 2143. But… maybe it’s not actually necessary to give that level of protection to the expression of ideas for people to be motivated to make them. In addition, maybe the harms of copyright aren’t balanced by the fact that people in 2143 will finally be able to have “Meg 2: The Trench” in the public domain.

    • ParsnipWitch@feddit.deEnglish
      32·
      11 months ago

      Why should an artist not be paid but a gardener or someone who build your house is supposed to be paid?

      After all, humans build stuff and make stuff with plants without compensation all the time.

      You just sound like a Boomer who thinks work is only work when the product isn’t entertaining or art.