this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
277 points (95.4% liked)

World News

39000 readers
2278 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This iconic mouse is weeks away fromn being in the public domain Jan. 1, 2024, is the day when 'Steamboat Willie' enters the public domain

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Robin Hood is a beloved story because each generation could do what they want with it, or King Arthur, or Shakespeare.

How is expanding "fair use" contrary to that goal? Creatives would be able to use Shakespeare or literally any copyrighted work as long as the derived work is transformative.

Nobody owns ideas

Ideas are easy to make. Implementing them is painful. Said pain should be rewarded, and Amazon shouldn't be able to find something just outside of the copyright window to copy and redistribute.

if you come up with something neat, sure have 20 years to try and make it successful, otherwise it's free real estate.

My issue with this is that after 20 years, some content farm could just copy a video, reupload it, then rake in all the profits. These farms already exist because copyright for small creators is rarely enforced. The creator literally gets nothing in this exchange, and creatives in general have way less incentive of making new works as a result.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

expanding “fair use”

I'm not talking about fair use, I'm talking about public domain; complete freedom to modify or redistribute.

Said pain should be rewarded

Yes, by temporary monopoly

Amazon shouldn’t be able to find something just outside of the copyright window to copy and redistribute.

Why not? Project Gutenberg provides an incredible service (and LibriVox) which is based entirely on the concept of old works naturally falling into public domain. Imagine how absurd it would be if you still had to pay the publisher of Charles Dickens to read A Christmas Carol.

some content farm could just copy a video, reupload it, then rake in all the profits

Do you see content farms making bank with public domain content now? This is a ridiculous scenario, you obviously have not thought out this issue and instead are just justifying your feelings on the matter. Old things belong to everybody, culture is meant to be shared.

because copyright for small creators is rarely enforced

That's a completely separate matter bud, go ahead and advocate for enforcing the law for small creators, I'm talking about what the limit for those protections should be.