Conversation

Notices

1. ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌 (violet_cerue@toot.garden)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 02:42:07 JST ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌

   "copyright benefits corporations more than independent artists" is correct today but it also doesn't strike the root of why copyright is wrong. it's not hard to imagine a paradigm where corporations don't exist at all but a system of copyright still exists for creatives to extract rents from, constraining and centralizing artistic expression. even if its enforced by social pressure instead of law. the claim that ideas and information can be owned at all should be attacked directly.

   • ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌 (violet_cerue@toot.garden)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:13 JST ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌

     in reply to

     • wizzwizz4

     @wizzwizz4 artists have more means at their disposal (i.e. selling prints, donations) to make money than just commissions. but sure, under the present system, most people don't make a lot of money. the response shouldn't be to double-down on capitalist rent seeking but --- as i said in another response --- push back on policies that inflate prices, depress incomes, and force people into wage labor.

   • wizzwizz4 (wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:14 JST wizzwizz4

     in reply to

     @violet_cerue Huh, the enclosure movement was a few hundred years later than I thought it was. (So how did feudalism work, then? I mustn't understand that properly…)

     Our current resource allocation system is based on property. If you're not treating art as property, then creating art does not give you a share of the resources, and (unless you're selling your art-creation labour, e.g. doing commissions) you can't afford to live.

     You have to dismantle the whole machine, not just part of it.

     Adrian Cochrane repeated this.
   • ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌 (violet_cerue@toot.garden)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:18 JST ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌

     in reply to

     • wizzwizz4

     @wizzwizz4 lots of folklore and basic scientific/mathematical concepts spread without those monopoly protections and we are culturally and scientifically better off.

     yes, individual property is older than even the medieval era: i was speaking specifically of modern capitalist private property, which did emerge in the enclosure movement

   • ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌 (violet_cerue@toot.garden)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:20 JST ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌

     in reply to

     • wizzwizz4

     @wizzwizz4 even if i grant that, i don't think that's a problem that can or should be solved by a formal monopoly power, no matter how temporary. and it gets less temporary over the centuries. the initial origin (our minds) of a production method or piece of art being secret doesn't justify backing it up by state violence any more than having a first-mover advantage in an industry entitles a firm to a legal right to stay in first (or in business) for any period of time.

   • wizzwizz4 (wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:21 JST wizzwizz4

     in reply to

     @violet_cerue Yes, that's true: but they were originally designed to promote the publication of inventions (patents) and art (copyright) by rewarding the registrant of the copyright/patent with temporary monopoly rights, iirc. – this was to compensate for the fact that a secret is *inherently* monopolised already.

     And private property "rights" are older than the industrial revolution; that goes back to feudal times, surely? The concept wasn't invented for factories.

   • wizzwizz4 (wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:23 JST wizzwizz4

     in reply to

     @violet_cerue The point of copyright wasn't originally to own ideas and information. It was:

     • to permit and encourage the sharing and archival of works;
     • to allow people to be creatives and artists professionally, without starving.

     Reforming copyright is necessary. Abolishing copyright cannot be done without ensuring a solution to these problems. (Modern copyright doesn't adequately solve these problems.)

   • ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌 (violet_cerue@toot.garden)'s status on Saturday, 31-Dec-2022 09:08:23 JST ☄️~Stardust Diving~🌌

     in reply to

     • wizzwizz4

     @wizzwizz4 this is not true. copyrights and patents have origins in monopoly privileges from monarchs in 17th-century europe, granted to allies of the crown regardless of whether or not they actually authored or invented anything. this is akin to saying private property rights, as we know them, originated from the hard work and thrift of factory owners rather than the state-enforced enclosures that dispossessed peasants and forced them into the factories.