Live data from Hacker News

Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

blog.archive.org

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#51
post #45

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

So, Star Wars (A New Hope) should have gone public domain 12 years ago?

I would kill for anime studios to reinvent A New Hope. The plot and the characters would translate to anime tropes really well.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#52
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't corporate branding be enough? Even if Mario entered into public domain, Nintendo Mario games would still be the superior choice. It isn't like people would be allowed to claim their game was an official Nintendo Mario game. Profitable IPs would also be able to grow their IP as a means of protection. For example, there would be a significant time lag between when Mario would enter the public domain and Yoshi…

It wouldn't be so much that thousands of people make a Mario game (people do that already) and Nintendo gets screwed as much as EA makes a Mario game and and uses the IP without paying Nintendo anything. EA being able to freely make "Battlefield Mushroom Kingdom III: Micropayments Edition" would not be a good thing.

Nintendo (or better yet, and indie developer) remaking EA's public domain works into better products would be a great thing.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#53
post #34

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

> Why have copyright at all?

You need some amount of copy protection so that people/companies with large platforms can't immediately rip off independent authors and sell their work before the author's version can get any word of mouth. (Where "sell" probably means "distribute with ads" since there's no copy protection.)

4-5 years of copy protection would prevent this, and that's on the very safe end.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#54
post #7

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

I think its fair that renewals would be allowed beyond that, but that the cost of doing so should increase on an exponential scale. That way the value of keeping a thing copyrighted would eventually be eclipsed by its value as a public property, fulfilling the social contract of limited protection in exchange for eventual public ownership.

Perhaps 30 years and then make it a yearly auction?

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#55
post #34

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

Why pay programmers at all? Your labor should be free too, and I'm sure we can make some awesome business models if you get paid five bucks an hour or less. You can go make money getting people to support you on patreon.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#56
post #55
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

Why pay programmers at all? Your labor should be free too, and I'm sure we can make some awesome business models if you get paid five bucks an hour or less. You can go make money getting people to support you on patreon.

> Why pay programmers at all? Your labor should be free too

No it shouldn’t, because labor is scarce.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#57
post #53
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

> Why have copyright at all? You need some amount of copy protection so that people/companies with large platforms can't immediately rip off independent authors and sell their work before the author's version can get any word of mouth. (Where "sell" probably means "distribute with ads" since there's no copy protection.) 4-5 years of copy protection would prevent this, and that's on the very safe end.

You’re assuming that we still want the “sell-with-ads” model to be the model to make money from producing works. I’m not sure this is what we want; we now see what ad-optimized media looks like.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#58
post #34

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

I don't want my painting to end up on a cigarette pack or a garbage truck or NSBM album cover at least until I die.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have the fee be based time but scale with profits. So that author making 5k/year's fees may only would only have the fee increase by a few hundred per renewal whereas a company making 500k/year would see their fees go up by a few thousand per renewal etc. As an example.

"Hollywood Accounting" just means that works will never generate a profit..

So include a condition like "for twice the (undervalued) amount you state, anybody can ...".

If they price they quoted was fair, they should be more than happy to sell it for twice that. If it was too low, well shouldn't have lied. If it is too high, more money to the public.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#60
I know a lot of artists and musicians (I work with them every day) and for considerable amount of them Copyright is absolutely NOT about money, it's about values. The work of art is a part of a creator which is at the same part separated but lacks its own will, so it's natural for the creator to wish some control over said part's faith.

They don't want their work to be used in ads, printed on cheap paper with atrocious covers, being used in a political context, heard in hold music or in elevators, and the list goes on and on.

I'm conmpletely split up on the issue. I'm pro-pirating when it comes to academia papers and textbooks, pro-copyleft, anti-streaming, wholeheartedly support freedom of information, and all of that, but I deeply respect the notions mentioned in the first part of my post and I don't know what would be a sound combination of these views.

Post reply on HN