Swift analysis... read what I wrote not what you think I wrote... I didn't state authorship was less valuable, I was saying the ability to EASILY copy makes people think authorship/origination is less valuable... if someone creates something then they have total rights to decide on any copy distribution (unless any rights are contractually signed away - usually for money to live) rather than a bunch of "the world shall all be free" woolly headed dreamers who need a lesson in living in the real world... I was trying to be nice but if you want to resort to insults and implications that I'm supporting piracy then I no longer feel the need to be polite to certifiable idiots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namekuseijin
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...
 |