Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Dec 2011 20:34 UTC
Internet & Networking It was fun while it lasted. This internet thing became too powerful, and shifted the balance of power too much to the people. Politicians found a partner in the content industry, and here we have it. After a mysterious unexplained 180 by a Dutch political party, ACTA has been signed by all 27 members of the EU. In the meantime, it's looking like SOPA, despite delays, is going to make it through, despite fierce opposition from the technology industry (except Apple and Microsoft, who don't care about a free and open web) and the very architects of the internet. To top it all off, UMG apparently has complete control over YouTube's content, allowing them to remove any video they don't like without even having to invoke the DMCA.
Permalink for comment 500621
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Steps to undermine ACTA
by subsider34 on Tue 20th Dec 2011 05:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Steps to undermine ACTA"
subsider34
Member since:
2010-11-08


First of all, all that copyright and licensing legal "BS" is there to protect the owners rights & interests. It works very well at doing so, but it can't help people who make bad decisions.

Secondly, you can not make a living off of releasing public domain works. Any music who says they don't care about making money with their work is lying to your face -- unless they actually do release their music free-of-charge.

The idea that music should be free is absolutely absurd. I suppose all forms of art should be free as well. Every painting, every poem or piece of written work, movies, everything. People always seem to forget the music business is a BUSINESS FIRST. Products are created with the intent of for-profit sale to consumers. People CHOOSE to participate in this business.

Perhaps, but I would argue that the copyright term needs to be severely curtailed, perhaps down to 20 years (fixed). This would allow authors to reap the rewards of their work, while at the same time preventing them (and their publishers) from smothering innovation long-term.

I understand that many people are opposed to having what they consider their property taken away, but the fact of the matter is Intellectual Property is not, in fact, property. It's the right to monopolize on a work of art. Such a right should be assigned with great reservation and only when it furthers the public good.

This comment has been donated to the public domain. Any allegations to the contrary shall be met with carping criticism, harsh letters, and a good deal of foul language.

Edited 2011-12-20 06:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1