I like having the options to sue in a court of law to enforce these rights a lot more than not having rights at all.
FiniteBanjo
joined 8 months ago
Eliminating copyright doesn’t mean they’d be allowed to lie about who wrote what they were publishing.
That is literally what Copyright is. Removing it means exactly that.
Not liking Anarchy isn't remotely the same as loving capitalism.
But you're not profiting off of it. The corporation is. They have no incentive to give you credit, every incentive to claim that they made it which they would of course be allowed to do. They could even start making their own derivative pieces or continuations. The artist has gained nothing from this hypothetical.
No, it would empower anybody, especially corporations, to take the new artists' ideas and work and repackage them as an item for sale to others. Anything you share would not be covered by copyright and therefor no longer be your property.
Individuals cannot compete with organizations.
Alright but Archiving is already an exception to most laws (clearly not well enforced seeing what happened to the IA) and your proposal would harm new artists who need to share their works in order to gain publicity for something they intend to sell and sustain themselves on.
You can say they're incorrect, but you cannot correct their intentions. Only they can do that.
As an artist, I like having the ability to tell people they cannot host my commercial works, cannot claim my own writing or characters for themselves, cannot reproduce them for profit, need my permission to sell them.
I think copyright abuse is rampant and favors corporate entities far too much in most countries, but I think the solution is reform not destruction of the system.
No, because OP clearly believes all copyright is bad while your corrected title would be at least some/most copyright has proven to be bad.
I know nothing about the samurai guy but I hope he loses. Japanese Nationalism is a serious issue.
Best answer
You would be wrong, in the USA at least.