Comments on: Copyright or Wrong? http://geeksofdoom.com/2006/07/25/copyright-or-wrong/ Stuff by geeks, about geeks, for geeks. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:26:45 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Bat Geek http://geeksofdoom.com/2006/07/25/copyright-or-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1938 Bat Geek Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:16:40 +0000 http://thegeekzine.com/?p=552#comment-1938 wow extremly interesting wow extremly interesting

]]> By: malcontent http://geeksofdoom.com/2006/07/25/copyright-or-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1911 malcontent Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:52:58 +0000 http://thegeekzine.com/?p=552#comment-1911 Here is another problem. There are priceless pieces of music that are out of print. The artist isn't making any more money off them because you can't buy the record (and the artist is dead). The records will all break or be ruined. It's illegal for anybody to copy them, to transfer them to digital, to preserve them for future generations. Our culture dies to be replaced with Paris Hilton singing about fucking. Here is another problem. There are priceless pieces of music that are out of print. The artist isn’t making any more money off them because you can’t buy the record (and the artist is dead). The records will all break or be ruined. It’s illegal for anybody to copy them, to transfer them to digital, to preserve them for future generations.

Our culture dies to be replaced with Paris Hilton singing about fucking.

]]> By: Andy Dabydeen http://geeksofdoom.com/2006/07/25/copyright-or-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1900 Andy Dabydeen Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:53:12 +0000 http://thegeekzine.com/?p=552#comment-1900 You bring up an interesting point regarding cultural heritage. Without the public and its consumption of artists works, there is no value in the work and is not worth the effort to protect. Cultural heritage is made not by the artist, but the interaction of the artist, her works and the public. The public is responsible for more of the value of an artist's work than the artist herself. We own it just as much as the artist that created it. Would Star Wars be the Star Wars that spawned a cult following and marked a generation without the public? Hell no. George Lucas is not responsible for that. He created the work of art, yes, but it's the public that gave it value. Of course, when greed gets involved it's another story. You bring up an interesting point regarding cultural heritage. Without the public and its consumption of artists works, there is no value in the work and is not worth the effort to protect. Cultural heritage is made not by the artist, but the interaction of the artist, her works and the public. The public is responsible for more of the value of an artist’s work than the artist herself. We own it just as much as the artist that created it. Would Star Wars be the Star Wars that spawned a cult following and marked a generation without the public? Hell no. George Lucas is not responsible for that. He created the work of art, yes, but it’s the public that gave it value.

Of course, when greed gets involved it’s another story.

]]> By: Marc Holt http://geeksofdoom.com/2006/07/25/copyright-or-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1897 Marc Holt Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:10:21 +0000 http://thegeekzine.com/?p=552#comment-1897 Copyright achieves just two objectives: 1. It preserves the rights to payment for a work through an organization dedicated to generating income from the work 2. It pays the artist a percentage of the income while retaining a much larger percentage for the copyright holder organization. Is this fair? No. I agree that artists should be paid for their work, but this is not the right way to do it. Take the case of the movie studios. They spend money on promoting their new movies on the internet with useless websites that are just another form of movie trailer. If the movie studios had any brains they would be employing internet technology to sell their product to millions more people than actually go to a theater to see the movie. I have been looking for a movie I acted in back in the late 1980's by a German company. It was called 'The Devil's Paradise'. If that was available for download on the internet for a small fee I would have got it already. Instead, I am frustrated because I know I will never get to see it, even though I was a part of it. Is that fair? Is that smart? Instead of prosecuting people, the MPAA and the music moguls need to get their heads out of their arses and start looking for new and innovative ways to market the millions of old movies and music stored away before we lose this heritage. But will it happen? Hah! Not while we have dinosaurs who don't understand the new technology running things their way. Ultimately, it's not about whether copyright is right or wrong. It's about how far-seeing the copyright owners can be...and they have failed us miserably. Copyright achieves just two objectives:
1. It preserves the rights to payment for a work through an organization dedicated to generating income from the work
2. It pays the artist a percentage of the income while retaining a much larger percentage for the copyright holder organization.

Is this fair? No. I agree that artists should be paid for their work, but this is not the right way to do it. Take the case of the movie studios. They spend money on promoting their new movies on the internet with useless websites that are just another form of movie trailer.

If the movie studios had any brains they would be employing internet technology to sell their product to millions more people than actually go to a theater to see the movie.

I have been looking for a movie I acted in back in the late 1980’s by a German company. It was called ‘The Devil’s Paradise’. If that was available for download on the internet for a small fee I would have got it already. Instead, I am frustrated because I know I will never get to see it, even though I was a part of it. Is that fair? Is that smart?

Instead of prosecuting people, the MPAA and the music moguls need to get their heads out of their arses and start looking for new and innovative ways to market the millions of old movies and music stored away before we lose this heritage. But will it happen? Hah! Not while we have dinosaurs who don’t understand the new technology running things their way.

Ultimately, it’s not about whether copyright is right or wrong. It’s about how far-seeing the copyright owners can be…and they have failed us miserably.

]]>