• polonius-rex@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Why do you think extending copyright past the life of the author helps the author? They’re literally dead.

    The only party that could benefit from something like that would be a corporation that can outlast a mortal’s lifespan.

    • Deceptichum@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      . . . I don’t?

      I think it and all copyright benefits corporations. This is literally the argument I’ve been making this whole time.

      I think copyright should be scrapped and human creations should not be walled off.

      • polonius-rex@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        they would fight for it instead of fighting to stop it

        Your argument is that Disney expanding copyright protections proves that copyright benefits them.

        But Disney isn’t expanding copyright protections in a way that benefits anybody but themselves. They’re abusing their power in the existing system, just as they would in any system.

        If it helps, forget about the literal Disney corporation. There will always be some corporation that exists with deeper pockets than any independent creator, because copyright isn’t the only reason that corporations exist. It doesn’t have to be Disney who steals your work, republishes it, and buries the original. Any corporation with more money than scruples can do it.

          • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            At the same time, everyone can profit from your work and you can’t do anything about it. And big businesses, having more capital than you or I, would abuse that to their benefit like they do the current copyright system. But at least the current system gives small copyright owners some semblance of protection and an avenue to contest abuse. Not having copyright would give a creator no avenue to stop someone else abusing their hard work.

          • polonius-rex@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            You publish a book. Disney publishes that book the next day, because they can afford to have people on payroll whose job it is to literally just scout out new books so that they can publish them themselves.

            Me, a book enjoyer, is going to my local bookshop. I ask what’s new, and I’m told about Disney’s new book. I’m not told about your new book because after all it is the exact same book, and Disney has threatened the store to withdraw all business if they sell anybody’s books but theirs.

            I buy Disney’s book. You get no money. You become poor and destitute.

            How does a lack of copyright help you in this instance?

            • Deceptichum@quokk.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Why am I publishing a book? I release my creative works online for free, for anyone and everyone.

              Human culture shouldn’t be paywalled off for the benefit of businesses.

              • polonius-rex@kbin.run
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Because you invested your time, effort and money to create this piece of art. Why on earth would anybody decide to create art if it was a guarantee that they’d die in a gutter?

                In your anarchist utopia, maybe an artist can thrive. But we’d have to get all the way there first.

                And in every step from where we are to where you want to get to, the artist is significantly worse off. You’re just letting perfect be the enemy of good.

                • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I invest my time, effort, and money into the games and stories I make and release for free online.

                  Why do I do this? Because creating is fun, and seeing others play or read them is inspiring.

                  • polonius-rex@kbin.run
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    because you can afford to because you already have a way to support yourself in society

                    also, not all creatives are idealists, so would need some form of incentive to put in the extra effort to release their work to the public

                  • Maeve@kbin.earth
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    I appreciate that, and equally that there are really good artists who can not afford to create and survive on their work, without it. Surely there’s a reasonable balance to be had, and megacorporations can be made to respect that balance (in theory), while also paying livable wages. In practice, it would require honest courts, lawyers, and politicians, so there’s that.