There is no copyright

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Spectrum

copyright to some means right to copy!
If copyright is eliminated we will be blessed - 80% (choose your own percent) of copyrighted material is C-R-A-P.

How does that work with the blessing? If it is crap, nobody wants it and then who cares if it is copyrighted or not? I don't want to look at it either way, so am I missing something?

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by carld

I can only speak to the way things are done here in the US. In this country bootlegging, or counterfeiting, merchandise, including books, music and movies is big business. We routinely read about busts and the seizure of fake goods. If this was legal and could be done above board and without fear of arrest, then as I said, I expect these operations would grow explosively.

Laws can apply to highly specific things if you wish them to. We can easily imagine a reworking of copyright applicable specifically to digital things, we have been working on it for awhile but it seems to have been leaning towards protectionism when we should be headed towards openness.

Do you understand that if nothing can be sold, the bootleggers would instantly go out of business, indeed there would be no business left for them. People should theoretically get their content from the authentic source, and be willing to pay the authentic source.

The right to a digital copy is a natural right.

[carld]

Originally Posted by tompe

The misleading thing is that you assume that it is the same artists that should make an income. Things change. For some artists this will be good for and for some it will be bad. So asking the question in a way that assume that exactly the same artists have to continue to earn the same amount of money is asking the wrong question.

Now you're being misleading and intentionally so. I never said that the exact same artists should continue to make the exact same income. I've always spoken in generic terms of artists and writers and so on. Not once did I intimate that things couldn't or wouldn't change.

However, there has to be some viable mechanism for artists of all types to continue to make an income. Without that, removing copyright is foolish and malicious.

[carld]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Do you understand that if nothing can be sold, the bootleggers would instantly go out of business, indeed there would be no business left for them. People should theoretically get their content from the authentic source, and be willing to pay the authentic source.

The right to a digital copy is a natural right.

Do you understand that saying "Do you understand" is dismissive and insulting?

Bootlegging would not go out of business at all. If someone wants a Bart Simpson T-Shirt (going back a few years when such things were hot), are they going to the mall to buy it for the high official price (and the price has to be high to offset all the counterfitters), or from the guy down the block, or on the corner, or at the flea market, who can sell the same shirt of 1/3 the price?

And why bother paying for a digital good from the authentic source when you can get every new book, movie or song just as easily for free?

There is no right to a digital copy.

[crich70]

The greater amount of people were also unable to read through out most of history as well. Why have a copyright on a book when 90% or more of your prospective customers can't read it. The stained glass windows in the old churches weren't put there for making the churches look beautiful (though they often do), but because most people couldn't even read the Bible much less any other book back then and needed a visual guide to tell them about the Bible. Storytellers went about telling their tales for the same reason. Few could read the actual texts the tales were written in. So there was no need for a copyright because only a very few could read and to buy a book (usually hand copied by the church) was expensive.

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Please understand that the content of a book was not seen as property for most of recorded history. The introduction of this idea into the public mind, and the ratification of copyright laws required the acceptance of quite a few number of if's along property conception lines. But these are just conceptions after all.

Abandoning copyright would require some more if's as well. Please accept these new if's.

[kovidgoyal]

Originally Posted by leebase

We have this with opensource. But the truth behind modern opensource is that most of the major projects are actually sponsored by corporations. Oracle, IBM, HP, even Microsoft contribute billions of dollars into open source. And yet those billions of dollars come from profits from their proprietary software. There won't be any such concept in this world.

Open source exists because of Oracle, IBM, HP and Microsoft



This just made my day.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

Do you understand that if nothing can be sold, the bootleggers would instantly go out of business, indeed there would be no business left for them. People should theoretically get their content from the authentic source, and be willing to pay the authentic source.

You don't seem willing to go to the authentic source and pay for your content now so why would that change without copyright?

As for bootlegging, if we are to believe the will be an explosion in the market for "value added" crap ons then why should we not believe that bootleggers will try to hone in on and undercut that market?

Originally Posted by Giggleton

The right to a digital copy is a natural right.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

You don't seem willing to go to the authentic source and pay for your content now so why would that change without copyright?

As for bootlegging, if we are to believe the will be an explosion in the market for "value added" crap ons then why should we not believe that bootleggers will try to hone in on and undercut that market?

1.I do purchase some books, If every book I read had a donation button I would be more apt to click it after reading.

2.I suppose someone could collect all the books by an author and format then nicely into an anthology with some illustrations and submit that to the network. But where on the network? It is predicted that sites offering ebooks for sale will fall to the fringes of the network after copyright is abandoned. It is reasonable considering that we tend to gravitate towards "free" ebooks and such.

There will be no market for ebooks.