Red Mosquito

simple schoolboy wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Posted about my loathing of IP rights today on Facebook. If you want to get production artists/illustrators riled up, this is a good way to do it. They cling to copyright like a life preserver, not realizing that its the very thing that threw them overboard!

I mean, that's what you'd expect them to do, right? Without IP their careers are pretty fucked. I'm pretty sympathetic to the authors themselves. Where I'd get very rude, as I said when this thread was started, is when heirs to authors, or corporate purchasers of works from deceased authors, cling onto that life preserver.

What's the alternate model? Onlyfans or substack and you just hope no one reproduces your work in full?

Who are you asking? GH's solution is pretty obvious.

B wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Posted about my loathing of IP rights today on Facebook. If you want to get production artists/illustrators riled up, this is a good way to do it. They cling to copyright like a life preserver, not realizing that its the very thing that threw them overboard!

I mean, that's what you'd expect them to do, right? Without IP their careers are pretty fucked. I'm pretty sympathetic to the authors themselves. Where I'd get very rude, as I said when this thread was started, is when heirs to authors, or corporate purchasers of works from deceased authors, cling onto that life preserver.

What's the alternate model? Onlyfans or substack and you just hope no one reproduces your work in full?

Who are you asking? GH's solution is pretty obvious.

GH would not do away with IP entirely. The people Burt are referring to probably have no expectation that their works will bring in anything to their heirs and so seems to be taking a position in opposition to the concept of IP in general.

Burt endorsing anarchy???

B wrote:Burt endorsing anarchy???

Technically, I don't believe in rights at all, but the collective delusion of physical property rights might keep us from killing each other over limited resources and land. i see no reason why that should be extended to limitless resources, though. I think the idea that you can own an idea is absurd and repugnant.

What would stop someone from publishing in my perfect system? nothing. but then again I think publishers would be much weaker in my utopia than they are in this fallen world. And people still appreciate the real thing and naturally want to support creative artists, so the artist will still be ok.

So someone else can copy your eventual manifesto and take credit?

spike wrote:So someone else can copy your eventual manifesto and take credit?

Sure. The point of a manifesto is to unleash your ideas on the world. Where people think it comes from is of little concern.

BurtReynolds wrote:

spike wrote:So someone else can copy your eventual manifesto and take credit?

Sure. The point of a manifesto is to unleash your ideas on the world. Where people think it comes from is of little concern.

Sure, but it wouldn’t bother you if Mickey took it and published it as his own?

spike wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

spike wrote:So someone else can copy your eventual manifesto and take credit?

Sure. The point of a manifesto is to unleash your ideas on the world. Where people think it comes from is of little concern.

Sure, but it wouldn’t bother you if Mickey took it and published it as his own?

They wouldn't want any part of it. But let's say I wrote a story and Disney "stole" it and made a movie about it without asking me.

First, I would sue their asses off, but not because they stole anything from me (because they didn't) but because they've spent huge amounts of money buying politicians to extend their copyrights that would have expired a long time ago, and because they support a corrupt system. But also because I just plain don't like them and would be happy to hurt them.

Second, I can't think of any real way that I would be hurt by their "theft". I could only gain from it.

If the sticking point is that they try to take credit for creating it, then good luck to them, because it's pretty easy in the internet age to prove I came up with it first. I doubt they'd even want to try to claim credit.

Statues of Mickey erected in city squares.

Lauded for his genius and vision.

A vast funeral procession through the capitol upon his passing, fathers and sons both weeping.

A hero to all.

spike wrote:Statues of Mickey erected in city squares.

Lauded for his genius and vision.

A vast funeral procession through the capitol upon his passing, fathers and sons both weeping.

A hero to all.

Only the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy gets statues.

The luddites are screaming for stronger intellectual property rights. I wonder how many of them would consider themselves leftists.

surely there's an important difference between IP rights and plagiarism? Like, I'd be OK with anyone having the right to use someone else's general idea, like a character for their story, like covering someone else's song, but if you straight up steal someone else's work and claim it as your own that's obviously wrong.

tree_ wrote:surely there's an important difference between IP rights and plagiarism? Like, I'd be OK with anyone having the right to use someone else's general idea, like a character for their story, like covering someone else's song, but if you straight up steal someone else's work and claim it as your own that's obviously wrong.

Roy Lichtenstein did just that and was hailed a genius.

Hmm yeah. Also, I think that parody rule is funny. You can use properties if you are mocking them in some kinda way, but not if you're taking them seriously.

It's happening. sort of.

https://baynews9.com/fl/tampa/news/2023 ... oes-public

"Under the Copyright Term Extension Act, books published in 1929, films released in 1929, and other works published in 1929, will enter the public domain in 2025. Sound recordings that were published in 1924 will enter the public domain. The character Popeye the Sailor Man will enter the public domain in 2025."

and

"The art of motion pictures grew into full maturity in the "silent era" (1894 in film – 1929 in film). The height of the silent era (from the early 1910s in film to the late 1920s) was a particularly fruitful period, full of artistic innovation."

Amazing that by 1st of January next year, the entire silen era in film will be in the public domain (of course some silent movies have been made later, but those were the exception to the rule).

Spoiler: show

The following list includes only films produced in the sound era with the specific artistic intention of being silent.

City Girl, F. W. Murnau, 1930
Earth, Aleksandr Dovzhenko, 1930
The Silent Enemy, H.P. Carver, 1930
Borderline, Kenneth Macpherson, 1930
City Lights, Charlie Chaplin, 1931
Tabu, F. W. Murnau, 1931
I Was Born, But..., Yasujirō Ozu, 1932
Passing Fancy, Yasujirō Ozu, 1933
The Goddess, Wu Yonggang, 1934
A Story of Floating Weeds, Yasujirō Ozu, 1934
The Downfall of Osen, Kenji Mizoguchi, 1935
Legong, Henri de la Falaise, 1935
An Inn in Tokyo, Yasujirō Ozu, 1935
Happiness, Aleksandr Medvedkin, 1935
Cosmic Voyage, Vasili Zhuravlov, 1936

Several filmmakers have paid homage to the comedies of the silent era, including Charlie Chaplin, with Modern Times (1936), Orson Welles with Too Much Johnson (1938), Jacques Tati with Les Vacances de Monsieur Hulot (1953), Pierre Etaix with The Suitor (1962), and Mel Brooks with Silent Movie (1976). Taiwanese director Hou Hsiao-hsien's acclaimed drama Three Times (2005) is silent during its middle third, complete with intertitles; Stanley Tucci's The Impostors has an opening silent sequence in the style of early silent comedies. Brazilian filmmaker Renato Falcão's Margarette's Feast (2003) is silent. Writer / Director Michael Pleckaitis puts his own twist on the genre with Silent (2007). The French film The Artist (2011), written and directed by Michel Hazanavicius, plays as a silent film and is set in Hollywood during the silent era. It also includes segments of fictitious silent films starring its protagonists. It won the Academy Award for Best Picture.