UNESCO Suggests COVID-19 Is A Reason To Create... Eternal Copyright

from the what-the-actual-fuck? dept

Yes, we've seen lots of folks using COVID-19 to push their specific agendas forward, but this one is just bizarre. UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) is an organization that is supposed to be focused on developing education and culture around the globe. From any objective standpoint, you'd think it would be in favor of things like more open licensing and sharing of culture, but, in practice, the organization has long been hijacked by copyright maximalist interests. Almost exactly a decade ago, we were perplexed at the organization's decision to launch an anti-piracy organization. After all, "piracy" (or sharing of culture) is actually how culture and ideas frequently spread in the developing countries where UNESCO focuses.

So, I guess it isn't so surprising a decade later that UNESCO is using COVID-19 to float the idea of an eternal copyright. I only wish I was kidding:

They phrase this as "just started the conversation," but that's a trollish setup for a terrible, terrible idea. In case you can't see the video, it's electronic music creator Jean-Michel Jarre suggesting eternal copyright as a way to support future artists:

Why not going to the other way around, and to create the concept of eternal copyright. And I mean by this that after a certain period of time, the rights of movies, of music, of everything, would go to a global fund to help artists, and especially artists in emerging countries.

First, we can all agree that helping to enable and support artists in emerging countries is a good general idea. I've seen a former RIAA executive screaming about how everyone criticizing this idea is showing their true colors in how they don't want to support artists. But that's just silly. The criticism of this idea is that it doesn't "support" artists at all, and will almost certainly make creativity and supporting artists more difficult. And that's because art and creativity has always relied on building upon the works of those who came before -- and locking up everything for eternity would make that cost prohibitive for all but the wealthiest of creators. Indeed, the idea that we need copyright and copyright alone to support artists shows (yet again) just how uncreative the people who claim to support copyright can be.

The way copyright works, with content (eventually) aging out into the public domain is exactly how these works already support emerging artists, by giving them more raw materials to build on and be creative around and to share further around the globe. It's the locking up of content behind copyright and paywalls that limits that cultural sharing and cultural raw material.

And, of course, one can only imagine how much Disney would need to pay into this global fund for all the public domain works it turned into its movies.

It's also not clear how all of this works. He seems to suggest that the eternal copyright would lead to money going into a fund that is used to support artists, rather than the heirs of the copyright holders. So, more or less a giant collection society for old copyright. Of course, we've spent decades detailing how nearly every collection society is rife with corruption. There are stories of them using the money to pad execs' pockets, of using it to lobby, and of frequently distributing the money in unfair ways that actually tend to favor successful artists at the expense of up-and-coming artists. Or in some cases, they just claim they they "can't find" the artists they owe money to.

Does anyone really expect that this new mega fund, taking money from ancient works will somehow magically give the money to smaller artists? Or will it just be used to divert funds to the already successful?

Again, there are plenty of reasonable concerns about artists making money -- especially during the pandemic. But an eternal copyright may be the worst possible suggestion, and I'm only skimming the reasons why. Dan Takash has an excellent Twitter thread detailing many more reasons as well, including how this would almost certainly lock-in certain forms of "western" culture, at the expense of cultures around the globe.

Incredibly, just days later, UNESCO is tweeting about how culture is part of our "shared humanity." Yeah, that's why we have the public domain. To make sure that the public can share in it all. The plan for a universal copyright is to literally take away that culture and to lock it up with bureaucrats who get to determine who is allowed to do what with culture and for how much. That's not a shared humanity.

Filed Under: artists, collection society, covid-19, eternal copyright, jean-michel jarre, unesco


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Samuel Abram (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 7:59am

    I would say Jean Michelle Jarre has possessed by the ghost of Sonny Bono…

    Seriously, eternal copyright is just about the worst idea that you could come up with, next to "Every child should be traumatized when they're three years old."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 8:44am

    How long is infinity minus 1?

    Isn't public domain the same as eternal copyright? The creator(s) get their fiscal reward during the monopoly period (which should go back to the 14 + optional (but expensive) 14 years) and then it remains as culture with creative recognition rewards, eternally.

    Maybe the eternal part should include required reference to whatever creator 'influenced' the current creation, though that list might get awfully long and has big opportunities for missing contributors which might extend the maximalist penchant for litigation.

    That satisfies all the objectives that UNESCO stated, without the money part, which has a tendency to stick to processing parts and never makes it to the supposed beneficiary(s), a likely intended consequence of the imagined protocol.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 9:42am

    I would suggest that the committee read Melancholy Elephants , but they would probably criticize the author for making the work available for free, and on his own website at that.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 9:45am

    I do not think that "Goodwill Ambassador" means what they think it means.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 23 Apr 2020 @ 10:06am

    Laugh riot

    "a global fund to help artists"

    Riiight, help the artists. There will be no middleman involved at all. Sure.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 10:23am

      Re: Laugh riot

      Well, only the real artists anyway, because clearly if someone isn't signed to a label/publisher/studio they aren't professional enough to bother with paying, though you can be damn sure they'll still be require to pay.

      And of course the people in charge of making sure the money goes to the correct artists will need to take a teeny-tiny cut, just enough to make ends meet really.

      Oh, and the labels/publishers/studios of course, after all it's only thanks to their brave and skilled filtering of real artists from amateurs, and as such they deserve to get a modest portion as well so they can continue to act as the brave caretakers of culture that they excel at.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 10:14am

    Want to be involved with culture? Time to pay up.

    Delightful, someone actually put forth the idea that culture should be locked up behind a paywall, only available to those that pay the toll and to hell with everyone else. Insanity like this is exactly what gets people thinking that copyright needs either be reformed or die, because when you start demanding payment for creativity and involvement in human culture it's pretty clear that your position is beyond indefensible.

    Still, nice for UNESCO to make it crystal clear that they have been utterly corrupted and are just another bunch of copyright maximalists and parasites(but I repeat myself).

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 10:35am

    Eternal copyright would only ever help those who are already entrenched as “major players” in the entertainment industry. You think that shit is going to help someone like Jim Sterling? Nope. Eternal copyright will only ever help wealthy people and multi-billion-dollar companies that have the money to enforce copyrights to the strongest extent possible and buy up as many properties as possible (to prevent other adaptations from other companies/people, natch). Anyone who supports the idea is either already wealthy or bootlicking for people who are.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Thad (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 11:20am

    Thanks for asking, UNESCO.

    I have many thoughts on eternal copyright. But, as I live in the United States, let's start with "Yeah, that would be unconstitutional."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 11:45am

    Why?

    Considering that Copyright was 14+14, and the ability to copy and distribute the copyrighted works was so much slower than in today's world. Why do these people keep extending the duration of Copyright well beyond any reasonable timeframe?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Samuel Abram (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 11:51am

      Re: Why?

      Why do these people keep extending the duration of Copyright well beyond any reasonable timeframe?

      Because Mickey Mouse needs to be in Disney jail for the crimes he committed.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 12:55pm

      Why do these people keep extending the duration of Copyright well beyond any reasonable timeframe?

      Because they see copyright as a form of “earned” welfare through which they should be paid until the end of their lives (and, for some reason, beyond even that).

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 1:02pm

      Re: Why?

      Because lazy and entitled people really like the idea of being paid forever for an idea they had once, or even better an idea someone else had.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Bruce C., 23 Apr 2020 @ 1:09pm

        Re: Re: Why?

        And yet, many legislators are willing to cooperate with that goal, they still don't like the idea of paying people a guaranteed basic income. There's not really much difference between the two.

        A copyright held by the estate of the original creator isn't benefiting anyone but the heirs. And they certainly didn't do anything to earn that monopoly.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Samuel Abram (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 1:22pm

          Re: Re: Re: Why?

          A copyright held by the estate of the original creator isn't benefiting anyone but the heirs. And they certainly didn't do anything to earn that monopoly.

          This is why I've written it into my will that when I die, all of the works I published will enter the public domain. I have no children, and while copyright is (thankfully) expiring now, it's still subject to retroactive term extension, so I want to make sure that there will be no Samuel Abram estate when I'm dead and gone and that anybody will be able to use my works (except works for hire) for any purpose whatsoever once I kick the bucket.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 1:20am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Why?

            "This is why I've written it into my will that when I die, all of the works I published will enter the public domain."

            The way the insanity which is IP law works you'll probably need to set it free under a amximum-permissive CC-license.

            The public domain has few legal defenders so it is, as we have seen, regularly poached in by opportunistic copyright trolls out for a quick buck. In a more sane world CC wouldn't be required, of course, but there you go...

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Châu, 26 Apr 2020 @ 4:23am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Why?

            Your awesome1 Please also have instruction for tell public your give cool stuff to public domain, hlep people know about it.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 2:11pm

          Re: Re: Re: Why?

          And yet, many legislators are willing to cooperate with that goal, they still don't like the idea of paying people a guaranteed basic income. There's not really much difference between the two.

          There is actually, in that the latter isn't likely to result in generous 'donations' to politicians, whereas the former would.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 8:15pm

        Re: Re: Why?

        "Because lazy and entitled people really like the idea of being paid forever for an idea they had once, or even better an idea someone else had."

        Like Steve Jobs, the Google kids, etc?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AnonyCog, 23 Apr 2020 @ 12:06pm

    Vampires don't sleep during the day either. /sarcasm Never underestimate the depravity vampire class lobbyists.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 12:48pm

    TRied for along time,

    To figure out What and how a 1 world Gov. would be like.
    What would the advantages be for anyone, any company.
    Or how to fix it.
    Understand that the UN has 1 really big problem here. There are 3 countries that Control the Whole thing. If you control/Bribe/... These 3 countries into do what the ???? wants, what are we going to get.
    First, is to be Subtle. and not to let things be Above board, easily seen, just make a few changes here and there. Controlling every nation isnt Easy, esp. If you dont want to TRY to control the people, you make it look as if they STILL have control.
    The only thing it would/can do is Change the balances between Each nation for certain things. Like manipulating the stock market to make the rich, richer.
    How many Major corps have extended themselves around the world, Kept or changed names in each Nation, but are still Run by the same people in the end.
    RIAA/MPAA used to have little control over things outside the USA and then the EU, and its spread to other nations now. It wasnt Copy protected if all you did was run across the border, and MOST naitons making music/movies DIDNT really pay attention or care to much. 2 Other countries that make movies for the middle east, and even All the Anime, Those nations DONT PAY actors 1/10th the wages the people int he USA get. But NOW, if you bring Music into the USA its still has Copyrights... But are the Creators/actors, getting the wages/money/profits they would/should/might get? According tot he actions in the USA, RIUAA/MPAA, the odds say, NOT A CHANCE IN HELL. After you pay off the services to these agencies I will BET, that the creators and actors end up Paying more on TOP.
    Its also been in the news abit, in the past(but I aint seen it recently published) how corps are trying to pay off the politicians in other countries to allow them to do things Under the table, or to get away with things AS they do int he USA. Many of those countries have some REAL strict laws/regs and those corps (where ever they come from) are slowly taking over those nations AS they have here.
    IF you wish abit of proof, go out and find a recording from another nation, and look at the label and Warnings, I will bet they are very similar, to the USA ones.
    As to other Corps, its about the same. Union Carbide still hasnt paid for the mishap they have from the 70's. BP has changed its name a few times over politics, and other problems, including Oil spills around the world. And why does our nation Subsidize oil exploration? Dont they make enough money from us??
    Seed companies around the world, belong to 3-4 Corps, and have Contracts NOT to reuse seed, and they have to pay for more seed every year to have better crops??

    We need to fix a few things, or its going to get abit worse. they are taking advantage of everything. The old ideals of capitalism are that If you can make money from it, DO IT.
    But if an artistic Family Lives on 1 persons creations, they dont NEED to make more Art.. they dont need to Write more books, create more Music, Make more interesting Computer hardware, they dont need to do anything, except SIT, and take money. You pay others to monitor it so no one ELSE gets anything without paying a Good amount of money..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    bhull242 (profile), 23 Apr 2020 @ 1:47pm

    At least such an idea would be unconstitutional, since a permanent government-enforced monopoly would violate the part of the Constitution that allows Congress to write laws granting copyrights and patents.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 2:52pm

    "Indeed, the idea that we need copyright and copyright alone to support artists shows (yet again) just how uncreative the people who claim to support copyright can be."

    Well, I think they're showing an immense amount of creativity in their arguments.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 5:50pm

    Did someone let Tero Pulkinnen into UNESCO?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 1:24am

      Re:

      As sad a case of wishful thinking and opportunistic greed as "Meshpage" Pulkinnen represents it's a fact that he's just parroting people like Járre and Valenti.

      Every "creator, artist and innovator" on the side of copyright maximalism is braying the same message, over and over again, in a unified chorus.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        ECA (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 12:18pm

        Re: Re:

        AND?
        The families after their death..
        Picking up Books and music that Hardly had any protections in the past, are NOW protected and giving money to Grand Children..Doyle, and Lovecraft among them.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 8:17pm

    Why stop with copyright?

    Can anyone develop their own OS for a computer that builds on Windows?

    SQL? Is Larry Ellison getting "earned welfare?"

    It's very easy for a news site that publishes perishable articles on current events not to care what happens to those who write books that are the product of YEARS of research.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 8:18pm

    Abolishing copyright would do so for major tech companies and their software, and a lot more than just the stuff people like to pirate.

    I favor a flat five-year copyright term myself, with very strict enforcement.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Apr 2020 @ 10:05pm

    UNESCO can go to eternal something for that option

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      ECA (profile), 25 Apr 2020 @ 1:31pm

      Re:

      HOW about setting them up, on a deserted island, and the rubber raft they need Costs them to much to even buy??
      HOw about we set them out in the middle of nowhere, and give them access to nothing except a CHEAP DIAL phone, with no connection, and tell them they can order anything they can, over the phone.
      Lets create a Documentary of UNESCO, then only broadcast in locations they cant get to, and move every time they try to Get there to watch it.(let them pay us to have a copy)

      Or we could show them a GREAT reason to leave it alone, as Jarre music would only be in the nations he has released in, and NOT sampled AROUND the world, and remakes and remixes of his music is Inspirational to everyone.. NOT just to the RIAA, trying to get money from every idiot that copied it.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    PaulT (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 1:27am

    I'm always slightly depressed when I hear this idiot talk about such things. I used to be such a big fan of his music and his innovative and visionary concerts. But, he's not done anything of worth since the early 90s from what I can tell.

    Bonus: I was first introduced to his music via a pirated mixtape, and went on to buy numerous albums after that (although I never did make it to a live concert).

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Ben (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 1:47am

      Re:

      But thanks to copyright, he continues to be paid for it. Unlike the rest of us who'e glad to just be paid at the end of the month for the work we did at the beginning of the month.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 2:04am

        Re: Re:

        ...or be paid for the social security payments we made during our working life in order to be able to coast through a time of record unemployment. Which is somehow more important to me than whether Jean-Michel Jarre gets royalties off his Oxygene albums in case he didn't properly invest the millions from his massive tours.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 6:25am

      Re:

      But, he's not done anything of worth since the early 90s from what I can tell.

      And like that their pushing for eternal copyright suddenly makes a lot more sense.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 7:49am

        Re: Re:

        Yeah, but it really shouldn't. The guy has a net worth of around $100 million and was absolutely huge during his heyday, and has inspired multiple generations with his pioneering work. What more does he need?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 7:58am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "What more does he need?"

          Recognition, you peon!
          Poor little Jean-Michel hasn't seen a group of screaming fans in years! No longer do young girls throw their knickers at him and scream for him to have their babies! He is no longer the talk among the young intellectuals who really should appreciate the way his albums and a few glasses of wine contributed to their birth!

          The least you could do is keep reminding him that he is not forgotten by sending him symbolic checks with money in perpetuity!

          Yes, there's an /s here.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PaulT (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 9:03am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            The sad thing is that's not even true, as he's had some successful tours in the last few years.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 28 Apr 2020 @ 1:11am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              "The sad thing is that's not even true, as he's had some successful tours in the last few years."

              Not enough to compensate for him growing, well, old, I'm guessing.

              Money may be a bad compensation for no longer having screaming teens throw their nubile bodies at him or for not quite drawing the massive crowds he used to in his heyday, but at least it's something.

              It's the nature of "entitlement". It's not up to him to remind you he's great, it's up to you to regularly pay him his well-earned recognition. Perpetually.

              What he really wants is a clergy, I believe.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 9:55am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Sadly for some people there is no such thing as 'enough', and they will always reach for more even as they drown in what they already have.

          Assuming it's not greed though two possibilities come to mind, either he sold out because it was profitable for him, or he's just really easy to trick and fell for the maximalist rot.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 28 Apr 2020 @ 1:16am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Or simpler still, as it is for so very many artists who've bought the idea that every copy of information they originally created is still their personal property when it's in someone else's head.

            "Because MINE!"

            It's the excuse of the five-year-old bully claiming his self-made sandcastle in the communal park and beating up other children wanting to play in the sandbox as well.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jeroen Hellingman (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 2:40am

    I was so irritated by this that I wrote a long email to Unesco, and I think it doesn't hurt to share it here as well, and urge as many people as possible to do the same in their own words.

    IJsselstein, 24 April 2020.

    Dear people at Unesco:

    As a long term volunteer for Project Gutenberg, which digitizes out-of-copyright books to be made available freely, I am utterly disgusted by the jarring proposal of Jean-Michel Jarre to introduce an eternal copyright. This will do huge damage to our mission to spread culture and knowledge to people, including the least privileged people, and is a direct assault on cultural freedom, diversity and creativity.

    I believe the idea of eternal copyright idea is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose and the working of copyright. The reasoning seems to be that if copyright is good, more copyright is better, which is of course irrational. It may also be based on simple greed, as I have seen before with proposals to extend copyright.

    For many centuries, culture flourished without copyrights, and copyrights only came into existence with the rise of cheap re-production means, initially as a means of censorship, but later justified as a way to correct market failures caused by free-riders. I do support copyrights to the extend that they indeed serve that specific purpose.

    Unfortunately, copyright terms already have become far too long, and as a result have become concentrated with a few large consortia that have been able to obtain monopoly control over large parts of our collective cultural heritage. What these consortia are doing with their pleas for more copyright is classical rent-seeking behavior. This must be resisted.

    Longer copyrights do not promote more cultural diversity or access to cultural heritage. On contrary. They lock up more works behind paywalls, and make them inaccessible, and in many cases that will even result in their total loss to humanity, as can for example be seen with a large part of early movies.

    Longer copyrights do not magically provide consumers with a larger budget to purchase cultural works. It will force them to pay more for access to works by long-dead authors, and thus funnel away funds available to currently active artists.

    Longer copyrights also make it harder for artist to build upon the creativity of those who came before them, which is, and always has been, the hallmark of a living culture. They will be restricted by requests for payments for even minor use of common "memes" or details accidentally included, which is already a plague imposed on currently active artists.

    In conclusion: long copyrights are bad for consumers and bad for authors. They hurt culture. They kill culture!

    If anything, UNESCO should be arguing for shorter copyrights, and less concentration of copyright.

    I am strongly be in favor of having a maximum length of copyright of one generation (lets say 30 years) from publication, that would be non-transferable and stay with the original author, with strict limits on exclusive publication deals. That would help artists much better than pushing even more restrictions on access to cultural heritage on them, while keeping the distribution channels in the hands of monopolists.

    Free access to cultural heritage is a basic human right (UDHR, article 27.1), and it is beyond me that UNESCO would even suggest to undermine it while the Covid-19 pandemic is raging across the world. To me, this is a beyond shameless. I am angry.

    Please support culture and reject the awful idea of eternal copyright.

    With kind regards,

    Jeroen Hellingman
    The Netherlands.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Valkor, 24 Apr 2020 @ 9:02am

      Re:

      Longer copyrights do not magically provide consumers with a larger budget to purchase cultural works. It will force them to pay more for access to works by long-dead authors, and thus funnel away funds available to currently active artists.

      This is the most concise argument against copyright extension I have heard yet. It does not "promote the progress" of entertainment arts, it stifles progress.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jeroen Hellingman (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 2:50am

    And yes, this makes me listen to music by Jean-Michel Jarre with a different ear. I won't enjoy it anymore. It is as with those movies or series made by directors who later turned out to have sexually abused their actors. Unwatchable and not funny anymore with that knowledge.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Thad (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 10:17am

      Re:

      It is as with those movies or series made by directors who later turned out to have sexually abused their actors. Unwatchable

      I mean, it's a little different than that.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Bloof (profile), 24 Apr 2020 @ 4:55am

    If I wanted to get UNESCO defunded by turning people against it's very existence, raising 'ideas' like these would be a good start. The social media operator should be fired for giving Jean Michelle Jarre's crap ideas any sort of oxygene.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    PrivateFrazer, 24 Apr 2020 @ 5:53am

    Damn it

    I wish I had invented the wheel a few thousand years ago. I would own everything now

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Naughty Autie, 24 Apr 2020 @ 12:50pm

    Fuck off, UNESCO, you monopolistic bastards! And I say that as a copyright owner myself. After all, we are all standing on the shoulders of those who went before.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 28 Apr 2020 @ 5:18am

      Re:

      "After all, we are all standing on the shoulders of those who went before."

      I'm afraid that according to every pro-copyright advocate with a lobby, standing on those shoulders means you need to pay those people - or their estates, rather. Forever.

      Copyright maximalists have a well-funded voice. The rational none.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Denise Nicholson, 25 Apr 2020 @ 4:34am

    UNESCO Suggests COVID-19 Is A Reason To Create... Eternal Copyri

    The very reason for copyright is to limit it to a certain period, otherwise, information and knowledge would be locked up forever. Anyone suggesting eternal copyright has no clue what copyright is and what the purpose of copyright laws are for. The whole world has been moving to open up knowledge for the very reason that copyright has been too restrictive or prohibitive. UNESCO has been a huge promoter of Open Access for years (they invited me to speak at one of their OA conferences in Copenhagen many years ago), which means opening up information and knowledge-sharing. So why would it now even suggest closing up all information under eternal copyright? Perhaps the pandemic has clouded some people's minds????

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Scary Devil Monastery (profile), 28 Apr 2020 @ 4:44am

      Re: UNESCO Suggests COVID-19 Is A Reason To Create... Eternal Co

      "Anyone suggesting eternal copyright has no clue what copyright is and what the purpose of copyright laws are for."

      To perpetually lock up the act of creation into the hands of prior successful actors who then get to act as permanent gatekeepers and profit in perpetuity?

      Because that was always the true purpose of copyright, both as implemented by the british empire, and later on as ensconced in the Berne convention.

      Every other argument, such as "for science the arts" or "for the authors" were constructed long after the fact to stifle opposition for the open middleman protectionism the legislation was all about.

      Copyright was always a red flag act. Quite openly meant to benefit no one but the gatekeeper industry of increasingly redundant middlemen.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.