Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

wikimediafoundation.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 321 posts

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#101

Post by adamc »

indigochill wrote: post #42
yeloboy wrote: post #31

Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all. Tell me one reason this shouldn't be the case. By then, the studios will have taken a profit (or been a commercial failure but that's not on us) and so will have the artist. After the artist dies, there's no reason to "support the artist" anymore and while there is the effect of post-mortem…

I agree with the gist of this, but I'm actually leaning towards a shorter copyright lifespan. Maybe 20? The reason being that I feel this better balances the need to benefit from your work (20 years is quite a while to be exclusively entitled to something) with the need for society to build on your work without threat of litigation. I feel 50 years benefits the former a bit too much at the expense of the latter. Just…

I can't see any reason to deny an author copyright during his or her lifetime. They wrote it. The public has no intrinsic right to take their stuff.

In point of fact, some kinds of work depend on the longer payback period. Children's books, for example, don't usually earn so much initially, but successful ones can be dependable earners for a long time.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#102

Post by [deleted] »

danaris wrote: post #84
Piskvorrr wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because without Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (granting many extra years of copyright), Mickey Mouse would be public domain. Simple as that - the agenda is obvious. Expect similar "extension" push as 2024 approaches.

Nope. Mickey Mouse is not subject to copyright. As a character , he's subject to trademark, which allows him to remain under Disney's control for as long as they continue to protect the trademark. What would go into the public domain is Steamboat Willie, the original Mickey Mouse short.

[deleted]

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#103

Post by hectorr1 »

ptero wrote: post #95
yeloboy wrote: post #31

Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all. Tell me one reason this shouldn't be the case. By then, the studios will have taken a profit (or been a commercial failure but that's not on us) and so will have the artist. After the artist dies, there's no reason to "support the artist" anymore and while there is the effect of post-mortem…

> Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all. There are, to me, two broad classes of copyright. One is for the "works of art", that is for things that people can enjoy (e.g., music). I suspect whatever choice we make the society would not be affected too much. I think your lifetime / 50 years is a bit too generous, but whatever. IMO…

I don't think that the distinction between art and technology stands up to scrutiny. Both are iterative creative processes, and we want to empower future generations of both artists and technologists to build their ideas in a way that advances the current stack. Allowing art to be balkanized with excessive copyright hurts cultural development. And we depend on culture to shape everything, including our current environment that fosters technical innovation.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#104

Post by bitofhope »

clon wrote: post #40
yeloboy wrote: post #31

Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all. Tell me one reason this shouldn't be the case. By then, the studios will have taken a profit (or been a commercial failure but that's not on us) and so will have the artist. After the artist dies, there's no reason to "support the artist" anymore and while there is the effect of post-mortem…

Lazy rich child A's dad built a house, which he and his children can benefit from for marginal costs (maintenance, taxes). Lazy rich child B's dad wrote some music, which he and his children can benefit from for marginal costs (publishing, taxes). I know - in one case it is a physical object, and in the other - immaterial. But both houses and music can offer enjoyment and can be benefited from financially, and thus h…

People don't usually make a living by building houses for themselves and their family.

Lazy child C's dad worked at a factory making drills as a salaried employee. After he retired/died, the lazy child had to get over their laziness to make a living.

Why doesn't the factory have to keep paying the dad's wage to his family for decades after he died?

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#105

Post by dmitriid »

clon wrote: post #58
dmitriid wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Immaterial rights are not material rights 2. Private property is a false analogy 3. Copyright was established for two reasons: a) to let the author (and only the author ) to profit from their immaterial work. b) to facilitate the free exchange of ideas

That is kind of the point - why is the dad who wields a pencil going to have to leave his children in a worse position than a dad who wielded a hammer.

Let's say "a dad who wielded a hammer" is a dad who builds and sells furniture.

Are his children entitled to every piece of furniture this "dad who wielded a hammer" ever built? As it was already mentioned "The dad who wields a pencil" can just as easily buy a house and leave it to his children.

The problem with immaterial things is that they can be trivially copied. In this sense copyright law is more akin to patents: you get protection and possiblity to profit off of your immaterial work.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#106

Post by MereInterest »

adamc wrote: post #101
indigochill wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the gist of this, but I'm actually leaning towards a shorter copyright lifespan. Maybe 20? The reason being that I feel this better balances the need to benefit from your work (20 years is quite a while to be exclusively entitled to something) with the need for society to build on your work without threat of litigation. I feel 50 years benefits the former a bit too much at the expense of the latter. Just…

I can't see any reason to deny an author copyright during his or her lifetime. They wrote it. The public has no intrinsic right to take their stuff. In point of fact, some kinds of work depend on the longer payback period. Children's books, for example, don't usually earn so much initially, but successful ones can be dependable earners for a long time.

> I can't see any reason to deny an author copyright during his or her lifetime. They wrote it. The public has no intrinsic right to take their stuff.

So long as an author does not share their work with anyone, they can have complete control over it for as long as they want. As soon as they they share it with somebody, enforcing copyright means that somebody is being restricted from the natural human instinct of retelling a story. Copyright is not property to be had by the author. Copyright is a restriction on everybody else, granted in exchange for releasing the work in the first place.

Copyright is a balance between rewarding the author, minimal restrictions on society, and progress of the arts. Unlimited copyright fails the latter two goals entirely.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#107

Post by ObsoleteNerd »

dotancohen wrote: post #52
Jerry2 wrote: post #37

I used to have a Youtube channel where I posted videos of me playing the piano. I played mostly Mozart, Beethoven and Rachmaninoff compositions. I had around 40 videos in total. Sometime around 2014, I started getting DMCA takedown notices from various companies claiming copyright. I was getting one or two per week and I contested them and things were ruled into my favor. But then it started getting harder and harder…

Who was sending these notices? Sounds like perjury to me.

Welcome to the DMCA. It's as broken as copyright and causing quite serious stifling of young creators. It sometimes feels like it's used more for evil than for its legitimate purpose.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#108

Post by ObsoleteNerd »

toong wrote: post #65
tallanvor wrote: post #24

It seems to me that a big part of the problem is that Google is focusing on this the wrong way. Rather than automatically assume that ContentID is correct and notifying the user, it should instead notify the supposed owner of the music, and let them decide whether or not to make a claim. If the "owner" makes too many false claims then they should be banned form the service.

I thought that was the way it works ? But they just hit the (virtual) "claim everything" button as fast as they can. Maybe the problem is that Google can't ban them from the service legally ?

The problem is that by the time the victim has fought to have their video re-monetised or reinstated, it's "old". You have a very short time to make money on videos these days. Yes there's rare videos that gain longer term success or get dug up and go viral, but for the most part those first couple days are vital.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#109

Post by matwood »

richrichardsson wrote: post #56
brann0 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide some proof that "pirating" (I hate that word) had severely diminished sold copies? And I don't mean all those "studies" based on the false premise that downloaded records are lost sales.

No I cannot, but conversely can you prove that is has not? All I can proffer is anecdote that as bandwidth and the ubiquity of Internet increased over the years, the sales of music via the label I'm involved with diminished. All the while our artists and the label itself became more and more popular, so it seems entirely counter inuitive that sales should have been dropping.

The album is dead. Paid streaming is booming.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#110

Post by ricardobeat »

zaphar wrote: post #77
richrichardsson wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I cannot, but conversely can you prove that is has not? All I can proffer is anecdote that as bandwidth and the ubiquity of Internet increased over the years, the sales of music via the label I'm involved with diminished. All the while our artists and the label itself became more and more popular, so it seems entirely counter inuitive that sales should have been dropping.

I would bet the drop in album sales is more likely due to the rise of Spotify and other streaming services than piracy.

This. In fact researchers a few years back came to the conclusion that piracy increased sales due to easier discovery + exposure.
Post reply on HN