this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
758 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
3024 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The key problem is that copyright infringement by a private individual is regarded by the court as something so serious that it negates the right to privacy. It’s a sign of the twisted values that copyright has succeeded on imposing on many legal systems. It equates the mere copying of a digital file with serious crimes that merit a prison sentence, an evident absurdity.

This is a good example of how copyright’s continuing obsession with ownership and control of digital material is warping the entire legal system in the EU. What was supposed to be simply a fair way of rewarding creators has resulted in a monstrous system of routine government surveillance carried out on hundreds of millions of innocent people just in case they copy a digital file.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 86 points 5 months ago (31 children)

I don't want to see a end to copyright. I want it restored to what it was. Where the creator had a copyright for limited amount of time then everyone had a copyright to the work.

Now that time is beyond the amount of time that someone inspired by a copyrighted work could create some derivative of it. Unless you think someone inspired as a child would feel like bringing that inspiration to fulfilment as an elderly adult is going to happen often.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago (7 children)

Humanity as we know it existed for ten of thousands of years without copyright. Copyright is the anti-thesis to creation. Everything humans create is iterative. Copyright along with the rest of intellectual property seeks to pervert creation for personal gain.

Art does not need copyright to survive and I would argue that intellectual property is not needed to promote the arts or science. It is designed to do the opposite which is limit creation to the benefit of the individual.

What makes this worse is the individual is now the corporation. Do you know that a lot of successful artists, particularly musicians, don't even own their own works?

Corporations benefit disproportionally by copyright. They have lobbied for decades to further pervert the flawed intention of copyright and intellectual property to the breaking point. Simply put, going down the road of trying to prove who created what was first is wrong.

Creation does not happen in a vacuum. Pretending that we create is isolation is farcical. We are great because of all those that came before us.

The telephone was invented by multiple people. The Wright brothers had European counterparts. These issues around intellectual copyright are a lot more complex than we are ready to admit.

We have billions of people now. Stop trying to pretend any idea, drawing, tune, or writing is unique. Rude wake up call, it is not.

[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Art 100% needs copyright. There is a reason forgery is a crime. Copyright is meant to protect small creators. Yes it is being abused by corporations but the idea that we don’t need it is absurd. Stealing someone’s work and selling as your own is fraud. Plain and simple.

[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Authentication of the author is not the same as copyright.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)