this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2025
553 points (99.1% liked)

Games

42134 readers
1944 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

According to videogame patent lawyer Kirk Sigmon, the USPTO granting Nintendo these latest patents isn't just a moment of questionable legal theory. It's an indictment of American patent law.

"Broadly, I don't disagree with the many online complaints about these Nintendo patents," said Sigmon, whose opinions do not represent those of his firm and clients. "They have been an embarrassing failure of the US patent system."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (3 children)

You live in a dream world. Why would I release my music to the public when there are people who will make a living stealing it, putting their name on it, and selling 1000x more than I ever could because they already have name recognition? And those people WILL exist for every form of creative content.

Artists need some sort of mechanism to protect them from exploitation that is inherent to capitalism

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah... victory belonging to the person with the widest reach and deepest pockets rather than the originator of the material/idea is one way to ensure that all creatives become paupers. This is one of those many on-paper ideas that, without the upheaval of pretty much every other established human social structure, would be awful in practice.

[–] kureta@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

Yeah... victory belonging to the person with the widest reach

I thought you were going to say something about Spotify for a moment.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

99+% of art is never sold. The vast majority of artist don't make money. Who really cares about the extreme minority who use capitalism to control our culture. They don't get to decide what the rest of the world does purely for their economic interests.

No they don't need any mechanism. The arts and sciences existed for thousands of years without modern silly interpretations for commercial interests.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

So for the artists that created works but did not sell them, you believe that they would be fine with someone else photocopying it and then selling it themselves?

Sorry I'm not a head in the clouds, utopian. I try to base my beliefs in plausible reality.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Yes. Art is interative. You don't even understand how art works that is how stupid you are.

Save me the utopia bullshit all I here is someone licking boots. What does it taste like?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Why are y'all so fucking rude?

I'm a bootlicker because I don't think getting rid of the concept of intellectual property completely is a good idea.

Ok Bud

And you know nothing about me and whether or not I'm a musician or an artist, so you shouldn't assume.

But I know for a fact that most artists would not be fucking ok with someone photocopying their work (that they didn't sell) for profit.

I know this because it literally already fucking happens, and artists hate it.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

You think every artist is a selfish asshole like you. That is just called projecting.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 33 minutes ago (1 children)

You are incapable of good faith discussion.

Hope you get help for your anger issues. Have a good weekend.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 12 minutes ago

You come here spewing your apologetic capitalist bullshit and you say I am engaging in bad faith?

Hope you get help with your bootlicking.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

Because you will be paid for it?

In the current world I could torrent your music and you'll be "losing money" and will end up investing more work in anti-piracy and advertisement than in making good music.

If instead you would be paid for the making of the music regardless of how many copies of a digital file you sold by a better system that's not based on private property and the means of capitalism, it would mean that you could 100% focus on making music and everyone could enjoy the things you made. You couldn't care less if I torrent your music in this new world. Hell, music would probably be mainly distributed by torrenting.

Everyone will be happy, except investors and people thriving of this inefficient and unfair system.

Meanwhile, I'll be seeding.

[–] AgentRocket@feddit.org 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

If instead you would be paid for the making of the music regardless of how many copies of a digital file you sold by a better system that's not based on private property

And how would that system decide how much you get paid and where would the money for that payment come from? How do you make sure a carefully crafted piece of music, that brings happiness to millions of people gets paid fairly compared to someone just putting together a song in 5 minutes by pressing random notes on the keyboard?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 2 hours ago

Any system to evaluate compensation would be better than the actual one, which is a completely mess that does not properly compensate artists for their work.

Currently marketing, frontstore presence and market dominance is far more relevant on a particular artist income than their craft.

Any system that actually would think about what people think about a particular craft, how much time and effort got put into it, how much it was enjoyed, etc, would be better. Currently is just about who can make more sales and get more ad money, the art is secondary and I'm being generous.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Ok but you're literally describing a utopia. That is not a world that exists in reality.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

So is a world without murder. That doesn't mean that we should defend murderers doesn't it?

A world where gay people had equal rights surely was an utopia on the year 1800s, look how far have we come. Thanks to people that though that a better word is, indeed, possible.

Why wouldn't we strive for a better way of doing things? Why defend faulty systems that we know they are bad just because those are the systems currently in place?

I do believe we can be better.

And if not... Piracy it is.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Just because we could do better doesn't magically make teaeing all protections down a remotely intelligent idea.

They're asking for a SPECIFIC idea of what to replace them with... because you dummies will just end up reinventing IP laws without 70 year copyrights... like they were originally...

This is a trains for public transit situation... You'll whine all day about the status quo, say nothing good exists, want to tear it all down ... and then just reinvent the same fucking thing we already have but just need a different mix of...

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I think you are arguing against an imaginary group of people here.

[–] Darkenfolk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Is he? Seems to me he is spot on. A lot of words about how things should be and precious little how to make it so.

Sure, you got to start somewhere but you also need a plan to get there in the first place.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 51 minutes ago

All the personal attacks were completely out of place. So that person is out of the debate for me.

You were polite so I will answer to you.

First. Pay per access is no-go. Art is publicly release, pay or not pay access for things that are costless to copy is unrestricted. This already happens, piracy exist and cannot made go away. It's just its legalization.

Second. Once pay per access is abolished. It's more important to focus in pay for work or pay for release. Focusing more on making the artist a person who is being patronize for doing their art rather than a salesperson.

Once we have this idea of patronizing, instead of private labels we could focus more on cooperative labels, taking out investors and useless middlemen. People could paid for some artist or some label (which will be exclusively conformed by artist) in order for them to keep making their thing. Some labels could be actually public labels, this already exist to some degree when some state pays for art to be made, just expanding it.

Now that we changed the model in a model were people give their money before they get to see the final product we should put some protections in place to avoid scams and then we are golden.

It's not so complicated really. Many systems already exist. The history is the same as with everything else capitalism and rich capitalists are in a dominant position so they make any change for the better harder.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I'm literally talking about how we should try to do better. I've just been around long enough to know that this ain't how you do it.