![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
deird_ljHave I ever mentioned my opinions on copyright?
Well, I think it sucks.
Copyright in its original form was created about 300 years ago, as a way of promoting the progress of the arts by securing the exclusive rights of the creator for a limited time.*
(Note: a limited time. Not forever.)
(Also note: 300 years ago. This is not a law that's been around forever as an indisputable right.)
So basically, copyright was invented to give authors the ability to make money off creating something for a few years after they'd created it, so that more people would feel like creating even more stuff.
I don't actually have a problem with copyright in its original form. It's really quite a decent idea.
What I have a problem with, is Disney.
Disney got involved in US copyright laws just when the copyright on Mickey Mouse (and various other Disney creations) was about to expire. And they had the length of the copyright period extended.
And extended.
And extended.
...until now, when copyright basically seems to mean you'll have exclusive rights to everything that happens to your creations forever.
At least - that's what people seem to think. And a number of people in very powerful positions now seem to think that's exactly how things should be - and think that copyright is a natural moral right, rather than a law invented as a way to encourage writing books and creating things.
Which leads to ridiculous situations like the suspension of![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
scans_daily.
scans_daily, for those who don't know, is was an LJ community where people would scan comic book panels into LJ entries, and discuss them.
(IT NEVER SCANNED FULL COMIC BOOKS, by the way.)
Some of the comics would be newish, some would be from decades ago, and some posts would be compilations of panels over several years so that the person posting could demonstrate changes in the comic over time.
A lot of the comics scanned were by Marvel or DC; a lot of them weren't. Obscure comic books that never would have found more than 10 readers were often discussed onscans_daily - and a lot of community members thereby discovered comic books they never would have thought of reading.
It increased comic book sales.
It kept people interested in comics that they were starting to lose enthusiasm for, it got people enthusiastic about comics they weren't planning on checking out before then, and it got people interested in comics when they'd always dismissed them as "kids stuff" before.
And then it got shut down.
Why is it that the world has forgotten the purpose of copyright laws - so much that someone can see a community discussing comics, completely miss the enthusiastic promotion of all things comic bookish, and shriek "COPYRIGHT VIOLATION! SUE! SUE! MY RIGHTS ARE IN DANGER!"?
It makes me want to scream and throw things.
It also makes me start to conclude that copyright law sucks, and should be destroyed as soon as possible.
*Yes, to create this sentence I did in fact copy a sentence from somewhere else, change a few words, and try to pretend I wrote it myself. Bonus points if you can tell me whose copyright I just violated.
Well, I think it sucks.
Copyright in its original form was created about 300 years ago, as a way of promoting the progress of the arts by securing the exclusive rights of the creator for a limited time.*
(Note: a limited time. Not forever.)
(Also note: 300 years ago. This is not a law that's been around forever as an indisputable right.)
So basically, copyright was invented to give authors the ability to make money off creating something for a few years after they'd created it, so that more people would feel like creating even more stuff.
I don't actually have a problem with copyright in its original form. It's really quite a decent idea.
What I have a problem with, is Disney.
Disney got involved in US copyright laws just when the copyright on Mickey Mouse (and various other Disney creations) was about to expire. And they had the length of the copyright period extended.
And extended.
And extended.
...until now, when copyright basically seems to mean you'll have exclusive rights to everything that happens to your creations forever.
At least - that's what people seem to think. And a number of people in very powerful positions now seem to think that's exactly how things should be - and think that copyright is a natural moral right, rather than a law invented as a way to encourage writing books and creating things.
Which leads to ridiculous situations like the suspension of
scans_daily.scans_daily, for those who don't know, (IT NEVER SCANNED FULL COMIC BOOKS, by the way.)
Some of the comics would be newish, some would be from decades ago, and some posts would be compilations of panels over several years so that the person posting could demonstrate changes in the comic over time.
A lot of the comics scanned were by Marvel or DC; a lot of them weren't. Obscure comic books that never would have found more than 10 readers were often discussed on
scans_daily - and a lot of community members thereby discovered comic books they never would have thought of reading.It increased comic book sales.
It kept people interested in comics that they were starting to lose enthusiasm for, it got people enthusiastic about comics they weren't planning on checking out before then, and it got people interested in comics when they'd always dismissed them as "kids stuff" before.
And then it got shut down.
Why is it that the world has forgotten the purpose of copyright laws - so much that someone can see a community discussing comics, completely miss the enthusiastic promotion of all things comic bookish, and shriek "COPYRIGHT VIOLATION! SUE! SUE! MY RIGHTS ARE IN DANGER!"?
It makes me want to scream and throw things.
It also makes me start to conclude that copyright law sucks, and should be destroyed as soon as possible.
*Yes, to create this sentence I did in fact copy a sentence from somewhere else, change a few words, and try to pretend I wrote it myself. Bonus points if you can tell me whose copyright I just violated.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-02-28 11:26 pm (UTC)Take...Neil Gaiman's thoughts on the whole 'Kindle audiobook' copyright issues. It's just pathetic. Who in their right mind would consider it a copyright violation? Reading it aloud within earshot of another person would be the same thing, going by that logic!
Tsk.
Besides- listen to (within that post there's a link) Wil Wheaton's text2speech thingy he demonstrates...oh yes, I'd much prefer to listen to that robotic emotionless voice than to the author reading the story to me on a real audiobook. No, really.
Pfft.