Why public domain

[leebase]

Originally Posted by MarjaE

People already do that. I mostly write historical notes, and don't really have a good place to publish them. But a lot of people write short stories and novels for free.

I swear to god. The fact that you and a million people write stuff no one is interested in for free says nothing about what will happen to the book industry when nobody can keep someone else from copying their work....legally...because "it's not property cuz...<reasons>"

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by leebase

I swear to god. The fact that you and a million people write stuff no one is interested in for free says nothing about what will happen to the book industry when nobody can keep someone else from copying their work....legally...because "it's not property cuz...<reasons>"

I swear to god you love your strawmen don't you?

As far as I can remember in this thread, one person has suggested it may be worth discussing whether copyright should be scrapped.

And you did post....

Originally Posted by leebase

In what fantasy world do we think people will just write books for free?

So point out that you are (arguably again) demonstrably wrong is quite to the point I would think.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

I swear to god you love your strawmen don't you?

As far as I can remember in this thread, one person has suggested it may be worth discussing whether copyright should be scrapped.

And you did post....

So point out that you are (arguably again) demonstrably wrong is quite to the point I would think.

I think you’re being unfair to lee, his comment about your and a million people writing...” isn’t about what’s written here. It was targeting MarjaE who doesn’t write for money and those like MarjaE. Though the assumption that no one is interested in copying it is a bit much.

As to the fantasy world where people write for free, this was to I’d think Barry and MarjaE not to those who feel copyright should exist but expire.

[leebase]

Ok then. Back to our regularly scheduled “free free free”. I mean...I’ll not outlive the supply of already existing books that I’d enjoy ready. And I’m not making my living as an author. And I’m no longer getting wages from that time I washed dishes for a restaurant in high school...so why should an author make money beyond his hourly wage.

Let’s just tear it all down....it’s not like WE have anything invested.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by leebase

Ok then. Back to our regularly scheduled “free free free”. I mean...I’ll not outlive the supply of already existing books that I’d enjoy ready. And I’m not making my living as an author. And I’m no longer getting wages from that time I washed dishes for a restaurant in high school...so why should an author make money beyond his hourly wage.

Let’s just tear it all down....it’s not like WE have anything invested.

And again, I can't seem to recall anyone suggesting we "just tear it all down....". I suppose it is easier tilting at windmills though.

However, if that is now your position then I ask the same thing I've been asking, make a rational argument as to why the status quo should be changed.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

I think you’re being unfair to lee, his comment about your and a million people writing...” isn’t about what’s written here. It was targeting MarjaE who doesn’t write for money and those like MarjaE. Though the assumption that no one is interested in copying it is a bit much.

As to the fantasy world where people write for free, this was to I’d think Barry and MarjaE not to those who feel copyright should exist but expire.

hhhmmmm......

Comment about fantasy world where people would write for free....
Pointed out that people already do that.......
"I swear to god just cause you write stuff no one wants to read....." (finishing with dismissive strawman of opposing viewpoint)

It would have to be a very charitable reading indeed to come up with the interpretation that leebase was being anything but rude, condescending, and argumentative.

[leebase]

Nobody is worrying about the free offerings. Yes, they exist and “nobody cares”....except their mom and 10 other people on the internet. Nobody is trying to infringe the copyright or term limit the copyright of those authors. We even have the Creative Commons license for those who want to release their content into the world with the caveat that all built on their stories also are part of Creative Commons.

People are advocating/discussing the doing away with copyright. And yes, I have complete and utter disdain for that notion.

If YOU want to give away your creative work...that’s your choice. Ending other people's copyright or doing away with copyright is taking the ownership away from the creators.

And that’s no different than confiscating someone’s business or nationalizing an industry.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by leebase

Nobody is worrying about the free offerings. Yes, they exist and “nobody cares”....except their mom and 10 other people on the internet. Nobody is trying to infringe the copyright or term limit the copyright of those authors. We even have the Creative Commons license for those who want to release their content into the world with the caveat that all built on their stories also are part of Creative Commons.

Which seems to directly contradict your "In what fantasy land do we think people will just write books for free" comment doesn't it.

Originally Posted by leebase

People are advocating/discussing the doing away with copyright. And yes, I have complete and utter disdain for that notion.

Actually one person has suggested they think it might be worth discussing the doing away with copyright. That one person also stated "And I'm not really advocating doing away with copyright...."

Originally Posted by leebase

If YOU want to give away your creative work...that’s your choice. Ending other people's copyright or doing away with copyright is taking the ownership away from the creators.

And extending copyright in perpetuity is taking away the currently held rights of the rest of the populace that ensures they get access to that creative work after a certain period of time.

So you advocate for, and are fine with, taking rights from one group, but not ok with taking rights from another group. Seems reasonable.

Originally Posted by leebase

And that’s no different than confiscating someone’s business or nationalizing an industry.

Actually it is quite different, as has been explained to you a number of times.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

hhhmmmm......

Comment about fantasy world where people would write for free....
Pointed out that people already do that.......
"I swear to god just cause you write stuff no one wants to read....." (finishing with dismissive strawman of opposing viewpoint)

It would have to be a very charitable reading indeed to come up with the interpretation that leebase was being anything but rude, condescending, and argumentative.

no.

More like

Barry and MarjaE made points for doing away with copyright entirely, Barry flat out saying it, MarjaE contributing that it wouldn't be as bad as people were saying.

Leebase counters with the argument that authors don't write for free, because those who do it as a profession don't do it for free. Those who do it as a hobby might, but they aren't material because as Lee later points out, though most should be aware of, the creative commons license exists for them.

Lee also points out that just because no one wants to copy the stuff that would fall under creative commons, doesn't mean that professional authors wouldn't be grossly negatively affected by doing away with copyright.

I don't agree with lee about copyright being perpetual, but he's not even arguing about that here, it's strictly limited to the proposal that Barry put forward and MarjaE backed up.

[ekbell]

I've read some very good contemporary works that have been put up on the internet for all to read. Some of my favorite short stories are original works published on a fanfic site.

I am convinced that if copyright disappeared stories would still continue to be written by those who wish to share their stories with the masses and many of them would continue to be very good although I expect that the lack of professional editing would spoil many an otherwise promising work. I'm not sure that as many non-fiction book length works would be produced and I am sure that paper editions of contemporary works would be greatly decreased.

However this does not mean that I wish copyright to disappear completely. There are very good reasons for an author to automatically have copyright even if they choose to freely distribute their work (see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/).

Also just because some people who can write well are willing to make at least some of their work available for free doesn't mean every good author would or should have to.

The current setup where works can be professionally published, privately published or even freely distributed seems to me to be a pretty good one.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

no.

More like

Barry and MarjaE made points for doing away with copyright entirely, Barry flat out saying it, MarjaE contributing that it wouldn't be as bad as people were saying.

Leebase counters with the argument that authors don't write for free, because those who do it as a profession don't do it for free. Those who do it as a hobby might, but they aren't material because as Lee later points out, though most should be aware of, the creative commons license exists for them.

Lee also points out that just because no one wants to copy the stuff that would fall under creative commons, doesn't mean that professional authors wouldn't be grossly negatively affected by doing away with copyright.

I don't agree with lee about copyright being perpetual, but he's not even arguing about that here, it's strictly limited to the proposal that Barry put forward and MarjaE backed up.

You are GUILTY! Guilty of being able to follow an argument.

People can write for free if they want. Good for them. The existence of copyright doesn’t matter to people that want to write their OWN MATERIAL for free. And “for free” I don’t mean “copyright held but copies given away without charge”.

I mean “for free” as in “willingly put in public domain”. Knock yourself out copying and extending the works of others who say “that’s ok by me”.

My co tempt is for the NOTION of making everyone's work “publicly owned”.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

no.

More like

Barry and MarjaE made points for doing away with copyright entirely, Barry flat out saying it, MarjaE contributing that it wouldn't be as bad as people were saying.

Actually, the comment from leebase that I specifically responded to came after the comment by barryem stating...
"I'm not sure I'm really advocating that we end copyright. Books are important to me and that would be a risky move with no more information than I have. But I think it's worth some discussion."

So I think that makes it pretty clear barryem is not "advocating" for the total removal of copyright.

I admit I have not bothered to re-read every post by MarjaE but I can't remember any post advocating the removal of copyright from that poster either. I stand to be corrected on that if you can link to one in which they did advocate for it

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Leebase counters with the argument that authors don't write for free, because those who do it as a profession don't do it for free. Those who do it as a hobby might, but they aren't material because as Lee later points out, though most should be aware of, the creative commons license exists for them.

Actually leebase countered with "In what fantasy world do we believe people will just write books for free?" Nothing in the rest of that post mentioned anything about professional writers either.

MarjaE simply replied that they and many others already do this. Nowhere in this response by MarjaE did they suggest this is a reason to abolish copyright.

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Lee also points out that just because no one wants to copy the stuff that would fall under creative commons, doesn't mean that professional authors wouldn't be grossly negatively affected by doing away with copyright.

Yep, all that came after it was pointed out that the initial comment was demonstrably false and after my responding comment that you thought was unfair.

Originally Posted by MGlitch

I don't agree with lee about copyright being perpetual, but he's not even arguing about that here, it's strictly limited to the proposal that Barry put forward and MarjaE backed up.

Actually leebase is responding to something barryem had already clarified and explained without taking that further clarification into account.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by leebase

You are GUILTY! Guilty of being able to follow an argument.

And you are GUILTY of not being able to follow an argument.

Prior to your post #403 barryem had already stated...
"I'm not sure I'm really advocating that we end copyright. Books are important to me and that would be a risky move with no more information than I have. But I think it's worth some discussion."

As far as I can see MarjaE is in favour of a short term copyright situation such as the current status quo. barryem is the only one, at least in the last 10 to 20 pages, who has even suggested it might be worth discussing if copyright should be removed and has gone on to clarify he is not advocating for it to be removed.

Originally Posted by leebase

People can write for free if they want. Good for them. The existence of copyright doesn’t matter to people that want to write their OWN MATERIAL for free. And “for free” I don’t mean “copyright held but copies given away without charge”.

I mean “for free” as in “willingly put in public domain”. Knock yourself out copying and extending the works of others who say “that’s ok by me”.

Yep.

And people can write under the current copyright rules if they want and accept those terms or not. One of those current rules is that yep, their work eventually belongs to the public. Just like all that work they used as inspiration for their own work.

Originally Posted by leebase

My co tempt is for the NOTION of making everyone's work “publicly owned”.

Well them's the breaks. Don't like it, don't write.

My contempt is for the idea that those who have benefited by the work that has gone before them are too selfish to pass on that benefit to those who come after them.

[MGlitch]

Lol it’s hilarious that someone wants to argue against someone arguing we shouldn’t abolish copyright while also arguing we should keep copyright.

Can we get back to disagreeing about how long a system we all now agree should be in place should be in place for?

Because really arguing over the argument of why it should exist with that it should exist is just a little too Kafkaesque for my taste

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Lol it’s hilarious that someone wants to argue against someone arguing we shouldn’t abolish copyright while also arguing we should keep copyright.

When you do something right for the wrong reason, doesn't necessarily make you right.

Can we get back to disagreeing about how long a system we all now agree should be in place should be in place for?

If we were all just disagreeing on the length of the system, then sure. Problem is that extending copyright for eternity, even if it only applies selectively to some works, is not a simple lengthening, but a fundamental change. Same as shortening the copyright length to zero for all. The latter tries to get away with time limited monopoly of distribution, the former tries to remove the public domain aspect.

Because really arguing over the argument of why it should exist with that it should exist is just a little too Kafkaesque for my taste

It should continue to exist, because without it the reason for it to exist in the first place would go away.