Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411279 Posts in 69323 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 28, 2024, 05:26:13 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGeneral***
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
Author Topic: ***  (Read 6437 times)
s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2011, 10:36:57 AM »

That, and proposing laws that look good on the surface like this one (Protecting the copyrights of corporations!)
Fixed. If you're a musician signed to a major record label, you usually own nothing. Your cut from sales is miniscule too (something in the vicinity of 10-12%). Mainstream musicians earn the majority of their via concert tickets and merchandise, which is why most of them don't have much of a problem with piracy.
Logged
Nix
Guest
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2011, 02:46:56 PM »

I like the concept of copyright as a way to protect innovators as they are just starting out. My problem with copyright law, and generally the reason that I disregard it in certain cases, is that it can be exploited as a money making scheme. When someone buys copyrights from the originator, the laws are no longer protection for the "little-guy", but merely become a source of income. Copyright should end with the person who created the work in the first place.

The major issue here isn't that laws need to be protested or not, it is that we have a congress so far removed from its constituency that it passes laws that mandate the behavior of many based on the desires of a few, and the intelligent inputs of even fewer.

The real problem is that so many constituents don't make themselves involved in the political sphere and just watch on in dismay or support regardless of what happens. Ultimately, your Representatives' careers rest in your hands, so you certainly have a say if you actually try to exercise that power. Subscribing to the Demand Progress mailing list and sending out the form emails they give you is a good first step.
Logged
ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: July 02, 2011, 03:19:32 PM »

I like the concept of copyright as a way to protect innovators as they are just starting out. My problem with copyright law, and generally the reason that I disregard it in certain cases, is that it can be exploited as a money making scheme. When someone buys copyrights from the originator, the laws are no longer protection for the "little-guy", but merely become a source of income. Copyright should end with the person who created the work in the first place.

but then copyright would be valueless to sell (since it'd be worth nothing once sold), which would end how a lot of people make money (for instance, selling the right to a 3d asset for use in someone's game, or selling an article to a magazine or newspaper)
Logged

eld
Level 2
**



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: July 02, 2011, 03:28:55 PM »

I like the concept of copyright as a way to protect innovators as they are just starting out. My problem with copyright law, and generally the reason that I disregard it in certain cases, is that it can be exploited as a money making scheme. When someone buys copyrights from the originator, the laws are no longer protection for the "little-guy", but merely become a source of income. Copyright should end with the person who created the work in the first place.

But who would be the owner of the copyright, it can't be a person since several persons may always be involved with creating a product, so it is the company, but what if a bunch of people split off from that company, but really wants to create a sequel, now they couldn't retain the rights to that game, since it is stuck with the original company.

What if a small company creates a product (with love) and decides they can sell that IP to another company, and from that money create a new (with much love) creative game that wouldn't otherwise come into fruition

And then there's the assumption that the little-guy is the hero in the scenario, there are plenty of tiny companies that makes a great living from sequels after sequels with no innovation, not that innovation is a must, there's nothing wrong with games being a source of income.

The laws can't be different for different persons, and people can't be judged after what they intend to do with something

If we tried to stop everything that had the potential to become a money making scheme/potential source of revenue, then we wouldn't have much freedom left in the industry.


Heck the freelancing job would disappear, since it involves creating something outside of a company and then selling the rights to that product to that company.
Logged

im9today
Guest
« Reply #24 on: July 02, 2011, 03:29:13 PM »

good. copyrights suck. you can't own ideas. buzz, you better come out and pound me, i'm thinking shit you thought!
Logged
eld
Level 2
**



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 02, 2011, 03:32:51 PM »

good. copyrights suck. you can't own ideas. buzz, you better come out and pound me, i'm thinking shit you thought!

No, you can't actually own or copyright ideas.
Logged

im9today
Guest
« Reply #26 on: July 02, 2011, 03:50:27 PM »

oh i'm sorry i am expressing your ideas buzz you better come out and pound me thats so different
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 02, 2011, 04:31:35 PM »

guys we invented open source and copyleft for a reason, who care if they lock themselves in a hole when true innovator surf on everything reasonable
Logged

ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: July 02, 2011, 05:52:51 PM »

ya; if it really is true that most content creators are against copyright and only corporations are for it, they could do something about it by making all their works public domain or creative commons or whatever. but most of them don't do that
Logged

Theophilus
Guest
« Reply #29 on: July 02, 2011, 06:02:05 PM »

I'm definitely doing it if this gets passed.
Logged
baconman
Level 10
*****


Design Guru


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: July 03, 2011, 09:43:49 AM »

good. copyrights suck. you can't own ideas. buzz, you better come out and pound me, i'm thinking shit you thought!

No, you can't actually own or copyright ideas.

You actually copyright completed products, brands, or minutae details thereof, like your characters or monster variations. Then, it's not like it can't be featured in other stuff, but the other party would need a written agreement allowing for the usage of it.

But when push comes to shove, I think Congress is just trying to fix the "job" issue with it completely backwards - take away anything there is to do, and we'll all have to find work, whether the jobs in question exist or not.
Logged

ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: July 03, 2011, 10:39:20 AM »

even if people can't pirate there's a lot to do on the internet; tons of free stuff and social media (facebook takes up a lot more of people's time than consuming pirated media does)
Logged

Pineapple
Level 10
*****

~♪


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 03, 2011, 10:43:29 AM »

As stupid as this idea is and as much as I'm definitely not behind it, the issue is being exaggerated - you won't be penalized for streaming copyrighted stuff, you'll be penalized for profiting more than $2,000 from streaming copyrighted stuff.
Logged
Nix
Guest
« Reply #33 on: July 03, 2011, 10:51:40 AM »

As stupid as this idea is and as much as I'm definitely not behind it, the issue is being exaggerated - you won't be penalized for streaming copyrighted stuff, you'll be penalized for profiting more than $2,000 from streaming copyrighted stuff.

I'm not a lawyer, but I would interpret the lines:

Quote
‘(2) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if--

‘(A) the offense consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works; and

‘(B)(i) the total retail value of the performances, or the total economic value of such public performances to the infringer or to the copyright owner, would exceed $2,500; or

‘(ii) the total fair market value of licenses to offer performances of those works would exceed $5,000;’; and

as meaning that even if the pirate is not profiting, the money "lost" can lead to imprisonment.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2011, 11:05:33 AM by Nix » Logged
Pineapple
Level 10
*****

~♪


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: July 03, 2011, 10:54:12 AM »

 No No NO
Logged
Hangedman
Level 10
*****


Two milkmen go comedy


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: July 03, 2011, 10:58:03 AM »

The very fact that we can debate this means the law is not transparent enough to prevent possible abuse by corporations or etc
Logged

AUST
ITIAMOSIWE (Play it on NG!) - Vision
There but for the grace of unfathomably complex math go I
s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 03, 2011, 11:05:37 AM »

just as an aside: doesn't the US have "fair use" laws that would conflict with this?
Logged
Nix
Guest
« Reply #37 on: July 03, 2011, 11:06:47 AM »

just as an aside: doesn't the us have "fair use" laws?

mostly for satire and stuff like that. Streaming a music video or putting copyrighted music in your let's play or whatever isn't included.
Logged
s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 03, 2011, 11:09:45 AM »

Ah OK thanks for your clarification. I take it using footage from a game in your LP would fall under fair use though (because it's "commentary")?
Logged
ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)
Level 10
*****


Also known as रिंकू.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: July 03, 2011, 11:35:08 AM »

fair use is up to the juries to decide, so it'd depend on whether or not they thought the usage was fair or not; it's a case by case basis thing
Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic