Search results

It also makes people a lot more negative and hostile to copyright because it's so misunderstood. It also doesn't help that the thing most people are likely going to encounter involving copyright is Youtube, which doesn't actually follow copyright law, but rather their own policies which are...

No, this isn't an argument, in fact, it's a combination of a "False dilemma" and a "strawman argument". You have set in place only two possible options for there to be about creative works, your preferred idea, and the idea you claim ALL OTHERS MUST HOLD, then you form an argument against the...

We have paid attention to this argument. Here's the thing, you've done nothing to argue that this is actually the case, instead you treat it as a self evidence fact and support it by appeals to authority, which is all this paragraph is. Here's the thing, Lordsfire is a fairly prolific...

You keep citing literary academics. As someone who's, yanno, actually got a DEGREE from said literary academics, let me tell you a little, terribly kept secret: they're a bunch of marxist who have a strict ideological and irrational objection to ALL property rights and engage in explicit...

That varies WILDLY by State in the US, as in the US property law is entirely controlled by the States. Further, Adverse Possession isn't automatic, it has to be litigated through the courts and it's entirely possible for someone who was "on the land long enough" to lose such a case.

I'm not sure how to prove a self evidence fact of the world. You're arguing that I need to show that the sky is blue. It is self evident and directly observable to me that individual works of creativity are unique works. You're arguing for a metaphysical "origin" of creativity that somehow...

No, it really isn't? I'm genuinely not sure how you can even claim this to be true with a straight face. Yes, many ideas are reused and broad concepts often shared; however, it's quite easy to tell that when a set of ideas are put into a single specific form, almost mathematically so. I mean...

See, nobody ever really claims they are ethically the same. In fact, most stealing of private property isn't ethically the same. Most folks see an ethical difference in stealing food than they see in stealing jewelry than they see in stealing a car. I mean, there's a reason we have laws that...

What? Firstly, what's your evidence there are none? Yes, both were famous and considered very successful in their day, but the reason they are held up is that their works have withstood hundred of years of scrutiny to continue to be taught and showcased. We cannot know what creators alive and...

No, I would equate it to entering into a neighbor's property unknowingly and taking an apple from the apple tree they planted somehow thinking it was completely "natural" for an apple tree to be growing in the woods. In other words, stealing. And this is different from any other form of theft...

Then you've never really been out in the countryside and wandered, or hell, even in a suburban area where most property lacks fences. Vast parts of personal property especially in wooded areas is not demarcated by ANYTHING when you're out in the land. In some of the places it would be entirely...

Is that not fairly normal though? If you are walking across the countryside and come across an orchard bearing fruit and you take some, most people would consider that stealing even if there's no signs demarking the property line. You've taken the fruits of someone's labor even if you are...

Ideally in a world with moral and ethical corporations? Nothing. However that's not the world, in a world without copyright, or drastically shortened ones, while the author COULD do that, there's nothing stopping another person from taking their story, printing it as cheaply as possible, and...

The articles I found mentioned it, but did not mention if they refused to use it because of copyright or another reason. I can literally find nothing backing up the claim that someone tried to claim copyright over the poem or song, and it in fact appears listed on as being in the public domain...

OK, so we've reached an impasse here. You appear to define "Enlightenment" differently than most sources I can immediately find, as Hobbes does not appear to be considered a member of the Enlightenment school of thought and in fact is explicitly considered to be a member of 17th century...

You're not wrong. Those of us defending copyright, as a concept, are not really defending the current implementation of it. The duration for copyright is to long right now. The way the courts are set up tends to favor the people with more money and that could use fixes too (but that's a whole...

Funny you should mention this as an example of copyright law not protecting the little guy and being abused by the Big Corporation because, well, you see... Once the issue was actually litigated, guess what was determined by the courts, under US Copyright law? "Happy Birthday" is Public...

Or I can just abuse my powers and pulls the posts into their own thread, give me a minute. :P

Firstly, copyright is automatic and requires no filing. The minute that you put words on paper in a unique way, it's copyrighted to you. This makes it unique among intellectual property laws, as all other forms (Patents and Trademarks) DO require registering. And on the second quote, no they...

That will do nothing to limit megacorporations and would in fact actually advantage them over little folks. Yes, right now our copyright laws are kinda fucked up and in some ways favor corporations, but if you just go and eliminate them entirely? You utterly remove the capability for small...