1. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    29 May '14 04:45
    Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
    Very succinctly put, and you're probably right. Especially with poetry perhaps, more than music or visual art.
    I am a complete and utter hypocrite, though, when it comes to "etiquette on copyright" for music, but I am a hypocrite who does not try to mount any intellectual defence of my actions.

    I think I asked the question here on this forum a few years ago: What piece of technology has facilitated as many instances of law breaking ~ in such a widespread fashion, and embracing as many people ~ as the invention and use of the "mp3"?
  2. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    29 May '14 07:26
    Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
    I don't think you're comparing apples with apples. Mobile phones are very different to books, music and videos. The very nature of owning a piece of art or, beigely, 'content' involves sharing it with friends and family in a way that is simply not practical with gadgets and the like. The Internet age has changed what was once watching a VHS with your ...[text shortened]... brities will always be with us in one form or another, and many celebrities do great things too.
    A very thoughtful reply to my post.

    I must say I agree with your assessment of the problem (though not the extent) but cannot agree that flouting copyright law is the answer.

    however you make many good points ... perhaps each is worthy of discussion?

    if interested I suggest in "General" as "Debates" is full of rednecks!

    Wolfie
  3. Joined
    10 Nov '12
    Moves
    6889
    29 May '14 08:06
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    A very thoughtful reply to my post.

    I must say I agree with your assessment of the problem (though not the extent) but cannot agree that flouting copyright law is the answer.

    however you make many good points ... perhaps each is worthy of discussion?

    if interested I suggest in "General" as "Debates" is full of rednecks!

    Wolfie
    Well, I'm certainly no supporter of Kim Dotcom and people like him, for example. They—him especially—bring out a visceral revulsion in me. I don't propose that people flout copyright law, but laws should be designed to fit or influence/change the world we live in now, not the world we lived in a couple of decades ago or more, so reform is probably overdue.

    I think a lot of good people have been trying to work out and propose solutions (whether in governments or in conjunction with them, or without government input I am not sure). I've been following the arguments in MacUser with quite a bit of difficulty at times, and I can't summarise them easily. Maybe I'll suggest they write a feature recapping and analysing their previous discussions with some new input from people like me. That kind of feature is not something they have done before (at least not to the extent I think is necessary) but they're smart people so I'm sure they'd at least give it careful consideration. I have passionate thoughts and feelings on the matter that I think they either ignore, or are not aware of, or had already dismissed before I started taking an interest, but I find it very difficult to shape them into words.

    You are welcome to start a thread on anything I've put forward. I'm a bit thread-tired now, so I probably won't start anything for a while, but if you do I'll try and contribute.
  4. SubscriberDrewnogal
    Constant Gardener
    The Plot
    Joined
    07 Aug '12
    Moves
    51487
    29 May '14 08:43

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

  5. Standard memberBigDogg
    Secret RHP coder
    on the payroll
    Joined
    26 Nov '04
    Moves
    155080
    29 May '14 09:06
    Current copyright and patent law is far too protective of the rights holder. For example, in the US, it takes 95 years for some films to become public domain?!

    There has to be a balance between rewarding people for useful inventions and ideas versus letting them make an ever-growing pile of money for decades on end. Give them a decent pile of cash, then share the thing with the rest of humanity, I say.
  6. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    29 May '14 09:09
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    Current copyright and patent law is far too protective of the rights holder. For example, in the US, it takes 95 years for some films to become public domain?!

    There has to be a balance between rewarding people for useful inventions and ideas versus letting them make an ever-growing pile of money for decades on end. Give them a decent pile of cash, then share the thing with the rest of humanity, I say.
    Why does the public have the right to something
    made by me? Now or after 95 years or 9500 years?
  7. Joined
    11 Oct '04
    Moves
    5344
    29 May '14 11:38
    Originally posted by FMF
    : What piece of technology has facilitated as many instances of law breaking ~ in such a widespread fashion, and embracing as many people ~ as the invention and use of the "mp3"?
    The car?
  8. Joined
    10 Nov '12
    Moves
    6889
    30 May '14 12:412 edits
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    Clive James : very intelligent, very funny - have not read
    any of his poetry but his journalism and tv chat shows
    showed the man to be witty, honest and forthright.

    I'm a little surprised he is still alive because I thought it
    over 2 years ago since he was "at the end". (?)

    Regarding copyright: always respect it - I have no time
    for idiots proclaiming "freedom" = sharing. It is THEFT.
    Heres Clive's short essay on the Daily Mirror journalist who caused the 'rumours of his demise' in June 2012 which were, naturally, greatly exaggerated...

    http://www.clivejames.com/essays/current/stillhere

    Here's the BBC radio programme (still available) which the journalist based his fake interview on:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01k1ls1
  9. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    30 May '14 13:04
    Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
    Heres Clive's short essay on the Daily Mirror journalist who caused the 'rumours of his demise' in June 2012 which were, naturally, greatly exaggerated...

    http://www.clivejames.com/essays/current/stillhere

    Here's the BBC radio programme (still available) which the journalist based his fake interview on:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01k1ls1
    There are 27 ten minute editions of BBC Radio 4's "A Point Of View" featuring Clive James as the guest presenter/writer here, to download or stream:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/povcj#7988123688837452
  10. Standard memberBigDogg
    Secret RHP coder
    on the payroll
    Joined
    26 Nov '04
    Moves
    155080
    30 May '14 22:28
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    Why does the public have the right to something
    made by me? Now or after 95 years or 9500 years?
    Because you did not make it in isolation. You made it in a society that set up laws to reward innovation and allow you to profit from it. In return, your innovation should be made useful to all of society at some point.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree