Quote:
Originally Posted by elcreative
For all the time humanity has been creating it has been originals or hand produced copies of originals and the producers were ALWAYS reimbursed for their work if it was their occupation... now we have the ability to inexpensively reproduce books, music and much other artwork so nobody deserves to earn a living from their art... copyright became a serious issue once copying moved from a hand operation to a simple technical procedure (starting with movable type) and was designed to stop people stealing another's work...
|
Swift analysis. Indeed music "composer" is so named for that hand copying tradition.
But the analysis fails to acknowledge authorship, it only deals with the mechanical aspect: painters paint, musicians compose and perform, writers write. Where is authorship in this? I'm pretty sure Michelangelo had many assistants in helping him with his largest works: did he receive same as his helpers? Is the value of his works due to him or to his helpers?
You're certainly not implying that copying is more important than content, are you? If you are, then feel free to copy this paragraph and send it to darknet so that I can become more popular than Stephen King and more erudite than Milton.
It's not because the artist was liberated from the menial task of reproducing his work that his authorship is any less valueable. If you believe that, just drop that pirated popular ebook you're reading and go read some free twits to uncover the hidden meanings of life, the universe and everything...
Quote:
"Copyright is holding our culture back!!!!!!" is a nice idea for the independently wealthy producer which, of course, you are or for the anarchist who uses a mask of his care for humanity as a disguise to justify theft, fraud and any other act "for the good of the people"... 
|
