At What Point Will The Next Generation Kill The Copyright Monopoly Altogether?
Posted 11 years ago on Sept. 16, 2013, 10:27 a.m. EST by OccupyWallSt (1) from Plainfield, NJ
For teenagers today, the copyright monopoly is something that the establishment uses to punish them for enjoying culture and science, to censor their protests and voices, and to prevent their art from reaching an audience. As these people grow older and come into policymaking positions, at what point will they just kill the monopoly altogether?
copyright-branded Before the Internet, and in particular before the compact cassette, the copyright monopoly was something that only concerned hotshot lawyers at the biggest possible publishing houses.
Before the ordinary person had the ability to record anything, the barrier to entry to disseminate culture and knowledge was too high for everybody and their brother to contribute to culture.
Let’s take a look at what happened when the compact cassette arrived. It was sort of an analog removable hard drive with music, that you plugged into an analog music player – the new thing at the time being that you could also write to it. Cassette players popped up everywhere, in particular in a form called ghettoblasters, where you’d carry a rather large box with loudspeakers and two cassette slots around, not to mention quite a few batteries.
Note that I wrote two cassette slots. All of these players also advertised how good they were at copying cassette tapes. You’d pop in the source tape, put a blank tape in the recording slot, and hit a gigantic button named “copy”. This was a feature that was heavily advertised – the better the blasters were at copying, the more music its owner would be able to collect.
The record industry at the time went absolutely ballistic, and said “home taping is killing music” in a largely ridiculed campaign. The bands at the time gave them the finger and printed that logo with the text “home taping is killing record industry profits” instead, adding “we left the reverse side [of the tape] blank, so you can help”. Nevertheless, this was the start of the war against ordinary people copying, something that has only escalated to ridiculous levels today. (Can you imagine a two-slot DVD player being sold today that would have a huge red button marked COPY on it?)
Today, people’s homes are raided at dawn by police with drawn weapons for listening to music and watching movies from unauthorized sources. (Imagine punishing somebody for listening to the old-style radio because the radio station didn’t have a proper spectrum license? How would they know?) Activists’ voices are being silenced using the copyright monopoly as a censorship mechanism. Secondary and tertiary liability is introduced using extortionate methods, further removing any rights to due process for mere freedom of speech. All while people in general share knowledge and culture as they have always done.
Entrepreneurs are even fined for playing their own music, as in music they wrote and played themselves, in their own cafés and shops – because the copyright monopoly construct demands fees to the collecting societies when somebody plays music.
All in all, the copyright monopoly construct has turned from something arcane that people didn’t care about into a downright oppressive and abusive construct that affects everybody in a way they strongly disapprove of. Laws must have the consent of the governed to be respected; the copyright monopoly today enjoys considerably less respect than speed limits, and that’s in a country where speeding is considered a national sport.
(This doesn’t mean that speed limits would be abolished by the next-generation politicians, but that’s primarily because the police don’t raid your home at dawn and confiscate all your phones, computers, photos, work, and conversations if you’re suspected of planning to drive above the speed limit.)
This is not going to hold. The next generation, the teenagers today who have grown up in this abusive environment, will kill this monopoly construct the first chance they get. And they will do so to positively thunderous applause among their peers.
I’ve chosen to position myself halfway on the Overton window in a position that allows the ideas I present to appear as radical, yet possible, as presented in The Case For Copyright Reform. In this way, I have set out to eliminate the worst abuses of the monopoly, solving 95% of the problems by going 75% of the way. Reducing the monopoly to cover commercial activity only, reducing the terms, making DRM illegal, and a few more things would go a long way.
Otherwise, when today’s teenagers have grown up enough to be pulling the strings, do you really believe they’ll buy the fairytale stories of how the monopoly construct that all of them saw as plainly abusive, oppressive, and extortionate is needed “for the artists to get paid”? When all they saw – when all everybody saw – was a monopoly construct that silenced artists, silenced challenges to the establishment’s status quo, killed technological innovation, and made sure that rich multinational corporations could buy the power they wanted?
There’s not a chance they’ll buy the fairytale stories from the copyright industry. They’ll all remember their own firsthand experiences. And they’ll kill the monopoly entirely, to thunderous applause.
A radical copyright monopoly reform is the last chance for the copyright monopoly to survive at all. It needs to be reformed to a level where it’s not grossly and repulsively abusive, and that needs to happen yesterday. If that reform doesn’t happen, the monopoly construct will be killed altogether, and sooner than we think.
If you doubt it, look at the SOPA and ACTA protests of yesteryear.
From: http://torrentfreak.com/kill-the-copyright-monopoly-altogether-130915/
Here are the things you need to know about copyright:
Despite the term "copyright" it is not about preserving a right to copy, but the right to keep your name attached to your work. That is, no one can take your work and re-brand it under their name. Technically, you can copy freely for non-commercial and non-redistributive purposes.
Despite prior case law history, copyright and fair use allow anyone to enjoy the work that has been published. The act of "publishing" (relating as it does to putting it to the public) has put the work in the public domain. You (the "author) can't simultaneously wish to put it in the public domain (to earn money, for ex), and wish to limit its access to the public -- these are two contradictory aims and the law cannot be put in the middle. The market (and/or the creator's ingenuity at hiding or convoluting his work) is the only mechanism to resolve this issue. (Although see pangaia.sf.net for a complete solution).
Fair-use allows others to make use of your work in derivative exhibitions, as long as you preserve attribution and do not deprive the author of legitimate (financial) gains therefrom. Mainly this means, as established in academia through the centuries, the ability to use your work freely as long as it is staying in a shared, community commons. Hence the work also of L. Lessig with the CreativeCommons.
Is it really your position that when you write a song, everybody but you is allowed to make money from its performance? Do you really think that musicians write songs and spend years perfecting their art with no intention of making money at it beyond the 75 bucks a night they make playing in dives? Do you really think that they're interested in a world where they have no right to cash in on their music down the road if it becomes successful? Do you really think that people will continue to create musical works if they have no way to make a living from doing so? Find some working musicians who write their own material. Ask them about all this. See what they think.
I'll tell you. I started music lessons when I was 6. Then I bought a lot of gear throughout my teenage years so that I could practice and learn the craft. If you're a classical musician, the instruments can be really expensive if you want to be competitive. You can't become a great violinist playing on a 200$ instrument. You need a good instrument to work on your sound. My friend's parents sold a house so they could buy her a cello. In music, it's not only the unpaid creation and practice time that you must factor in. You must also look at all the expenses that person and their family paid throughout the formative years. It probably cost me a lot more to study music then it does for a doctor to pay his studies. And, at the end of the day, I'm not making anywhere close to what a doctor is making. Again, not complaining. My choice. But, my God, don't take away my small way of making money. Don't take away my copyrights.
Damn straight. By the time you get to the point where you can write a good song or cut a good album, you've spent decades of your life on practice and study, a vast sum of money on equipment and lessons and all the rest, and the passed up on the opportunity to make a whole lot more money doing something else. And then after all that you finally write a good song and someone big picks it up, and folks want to screw you out of that 10 cents a copy in royalties you get for every copy it sells, and call you greedy for wanting it. But they have no problem taking it and doing whatever they like with it, including making money themselves.
Exactly, then people will tell you - "Look at that writer, he's so lucky! His book rights were purchased for 300,000$! The guys rich, why he is so greedy! What about your friend who just sold his song to a top prime time TV show in US! He made a lot of money on that!"
True, but that writer worked many years for free. And, he might not get another good deal. Most don't. If you average out what he made throughout the years, that $300,000 is not that much. And, he was lucky, many don't even make that. Same for the musicians.
But does the writer actually get a fair deal or is it who bought the rights got a steal?
If it's not a fair deal, he doesn't have to make it. His business decision. You'd have to make a case by case analysis. I'm sure some writers get very good deals, and some get ripped off. Some writers are smart businessmen, some aren't.
What I do know is that if they have no copyrights, then they make no money. Signing a bad deal is still more money then people using your material for free.
Killing copyrights is not the answer. Not as long as we live in a capitalist society in which artists need to buy food, shelter, etc... like everybody else.
If Occupy wants to fight against big companies so they give better deals to artists that would be cool. If Occupy wants to fight to take away copyrights from artists, then that's not really cool. This proposal goes against the little guy, not against big corporations.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
When was anyone raided by an armed SWAT team for watching or listening to copyrighted media?
[Removed]
[Removed]
Well there ya go - just as U wished - 4 the 2nd time now. Ur crap comments have been removed from this thread so U don't have to feel bad about wrecking the post.
Now - instead of continuing Ur crap - why don't U just continue Ur conversation with Urself ( s? ). OH and not 2 worry this is Ur only current account - I know U just hate using socks.
[Removed]
[Removed]
Again U continue with Ur crap - have Ur discussion with Ur self ( s? ) and just leave me out of it.
[Removed]
And another sock checks in. Re-read the comments addressed 2 Ur other socks. BuBye.
[Removed]
[Removed]
But "I" can't remove those - they would have 2 B deleted. And that's not fair - I mean if U complained 2 the site and the site agreed with U that Ur comments should not have been removed - well - Hell - what would I do? - my comments would still be deleted.
No U go ahead and lodge Ur complaints - if the site feels that U have merit - well then - the site can remove my comments.
Easy peasy lemon squeezy.
OH HELL I forgot - U don't like/trust the admin of this site - so Ur not gonna complain - well if U don't like or trust this site - just WTF R U doing here? Never Mind - just kidding - Ur here 2 disrupt. SOSDD
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
C ??? U just can't help Ur self - blah ba blah ba blah dabibidy blahblah.
[Removed]
U should send in a complaint 2 the abuse e-mail address.
Still can't stop Urself from replying - can you? Didn't think you could.
[Removed]
U never could stop Ur fingers from typing when chastising Urself in the mirror.
ALSO - yet again U can not help Urself but 2 continue Ur stupid game.
[Removed]
[Removed]
Sure sure - why don't ya try it and find out?
The users of this site are tired of U and Ur endless supply of socks.
[Removed]
What does score have 2 do with it? I don't give a crap how many points I have - but U have always been obsessed with points - haven't ya!
Yah U fuck up the forum with Ur constant attacks and then try 2 blame me. Are you by chance a Republican? Because that is what they like 2 do as well - blame someone else 4 their crap. No offense 2 anyone as they don't exist anymore ( the Republican party ).
[Removed]
Actually, I've just been a little busy, but thanks for mentioning me.
I did enjoy participating when I had more time on my hands.
[Removed]
1) U know damn well that U and Ur socks have been attacking my score as well as other's scores. Obsessive little shit aren't U.
2) "U" continued with Ur BS. All of Ur off topic off the rails crap comments were removed. SO you could have continued Ur conversation with Urself had U wanted 2. But instead U continue with Ur lame ass crap.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
AWWW sock whats the matter - Ur other sock wanted 2 start over from before it went off the rails with it's crap. SO - now it can.
Smiles Everyone Smiles.
[Removed]
Whoop there it is Bomp Bomp Bomp
By the way - who did U used 2 be? As "I" have not banned anyone tonight.
[Removed]
No as that is still an active account.
No as that is still an active account. Don't believe me? ( Hah as if ) check with the site or ask someone to make a comment to your other usernames.
Still U R a stubborn cuss - U will continue 2 play innocent - why should this time be any different than all of the past times.
[Removed]
BULLSHIT - the only comments removed were after U complained that U had made a mess of this post with Ur off the rails crap. So it looked like those comments were removed - giving U what U wanted - the crap comments gone and a chance 2 continue Ur conversation with "Urself".
Whoop Bomp Bomp BompBomp there it is. Ur age old complaint. Must really piss U off that U get spanked all the time by someone U feel is so below U - HEY?
[Removed]
OH go play with yourselves - somewhere else - like on Ur own 4um that U keep saying that U should start - but U never have and U never will.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
This post reminded me of the early days. An intelligent, completely on-topic, and informative post. I know a tad about patents and copyrights but was happy to learn something new from penguento's knowledge base as a lawyer and your experiences as an artist. I miss those early days.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
Good talking to you. Good luck with the music thing. I envy you more than a bit - in an ideal world, I'd be doing the same thing. I'm one of the wanna-be's - solid club level player, can't write a song worth a shit. Write a hit, make a mint, buy a Ferrari. Remember me when you're tooling around in it with your woman.
[Removed]
[Removed]