• jimbo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    What a weird stance that you don’t think anyone should be able to be compensated for their work. That’s literally what the purpose of copyright is.

    • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Actually that’s not the purpose of copyright - people would be able to profit without copyright. You can argue about how much or how little they could profit, or how much more or less convenient it would be to consume their work. The purpose of copyright is to limit this period of exclusivity, and ensure that after the period expires, ownership reverts to the people. It’s a trade- government allows exclusive profit on the condition that it is temporary.

      The problem is copyright has been perverted over the last hundred years, mostly by Disney, to the point that it is effectively permanent.

    • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      >you don’t think anyone should be able to be compensated for their work.

      that’s not what they said. no one is saying that.

      • jimbo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        You want to do away with copyright. Maybe think a bit harder about the implications of the things you think you want.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Maybe you can point out where I said what you claimed I said. I want to see it. Not what you choose to infer because strawman arguments are easier than actual arguments.

          • jimbo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Maybe you can point out where I said what you claimed I said.

            I guess I’ll just reply with your own comment:

            It isn’t about what the charges are it is about what people think. If we redefined the crime of murder as “foo” and charged people the same way it isn’t like murder went away.

            Whatever value copyright was supposed to give us it has failed to do so. Abolish it.

            Maybe you don’t actually know what abolish means?

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              that you don’t think anyone should be able to be compensated for their work.

              Point to the comment that I advocated this.

              • jimbo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                How is someone going to be compensated for their creative work if anyone can come along and just make copies of it? Copyright prevents people from just making copies of other people’s work. You want to do away with copyright, thus removing that protection and severely hindering the ability of anyone to make money from creative works.

    • HACKthePRISONS@kolektiva.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      >That’s literally what the purpose of copyright is.

      the purpose of copyrigth is to stop 18th century british printers from breaking each others’ knees over who was allowed to publish the works of long-dead shakespeare