Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
Circumvention of copy protection is a criminal offence, unauthorised distribution of digital content is just a civil offence (at the moment). If you are going to pick and choose which laws you will obey and which laws you will ignore, shouldn't the severity of the offence be considered? If not, why not?
|
Firstly, I admit I wasn't aware of that. To me, it seems logical that distribution of content should be a more serious offense. So, I don't get that. It seems stupid.
As for the answer to your question - what EowynCarter said.
@zelda_pinwheel,
I don't think society is being deprived. I mean, who the heck wants a Sci-Fi story with Smurfs and Mickey Mouse? Not me!
Okay, on a serious note, though. Why would copyright prevent derivative works? It would prevent using the
exact existing creations (like Mickey Mouse), but I don't think it will cease the creation of wonderful new projects that were inspired by Disney, or George Lucas, or Tolkien, or whoever.
Installing Mickey in your Sci-Fi story isn't merely derivative or inspired, it's you ripping off someone else's imagination and creativity. It's hanging on to Disney's coattails. It's mooching off their success. It's lazy. The examples you gave might have been 'inspired' by others, they might have been derived, but they weren't literally the same. They weren't transplanted wholly and exactly from someone else's work. This approach doesn't encourage creativity, it stifles it. Everyone will just end up putting Mickey Mouse/Hans Solo/Gandalf in their own half-assed creations, instead of doing something
original.
@guyanonymous,
Quote:
To greatly reduce/end piracy?
1. Lower prices.
2. Shorter copyright - I suggest <10 years.
3. World-wide access to content legally.
|
1. Agree
2. Shorter, fine. But less than 10 years is probably too short.
3. Hell yes!