actually that quote i stole it from this user on techdirt
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120908/13441520319/funniestmost-insightful-comments-week-techdirt.shtml#c632
it was so good i copied it and saved it up right away.
No, the holder already can do that. He does not need the government to tell him that he can.
?The right to make adaptations and derivative works.?
No, again the holder already can do that.
?The right to perform or display the work publicly??
Again, this isn?t a right being granted to the holder, he is permitted to perform the work as he sees fit. None of these rights are granted to the holder by copyright law; they exist independently. What copyright law does is take away the rights of everyone else to do these things.
http://wiki.fuwanovel.org/index.php/Copyright_is_Not_a_Natural_Inalienable_Human_Right
?What should other artists do? Well, I?m not really bothered. The sad truth is that almost every artist who tries to earn money will fail. This has nothing to do with the internet, of course. Consider the remarkable statement from Alanis Morissette?s attorney at the Future of Music Conference: 97% of the artists signed to a major label before Napster earned $600 or less a year from it. And these were the lucky lotto winners, the tiny fraction of 1% who made it to a record deal. Almost every artist who sets out to earn a living from art won?t get there (for me, it took 19 years before I could afford to quit my day job), whether or not they give away their work, sign to a label, or stick it through every letterbox in Zone 1.?
Also consider,
Jim C Hines?s 2010 survey of novelists: "The average time an author spent writing BEFORE a sale is 11 years!"
http://sharingisliberty.wordpress.com/2012/07/18/the-average-time-an-author-spent-writing-before-a-sale-is-11-years/
"My criticism of libertarianism has always been...but they're completely blind to the fact that privately owned entities are prone to do the same thing" [/quote]
therefore it comes to pass that the best way to solve the problem of small government or big government must be to look thoroughly through the whole of history to find out what worked best? Do we agree on that?
There is not a mistake left under the sun that humans have not already committed. The answers are already there. You can theorize all day, but theory alone will not arrive at the answer. What do you think?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Aaeru.
actually that quote i stole it from this user on techdirt
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120908/13441520319/funniestmost-insightful-comments-week-techdirt.shtml#c632
it was so good i copied it and saved it up right away.
?Copyright grants its holder certain rights.?
?Copyright grants its holder certain rights.?
What rights does copyright grant to the holder?
?The right to produce copies or reproductions??
No, the holder already can do that. He does not need the government to tell him that he can.
?The right to make adaptations and derivative works.?
No, again the holder already can do that.
?The right to perform or display the work publicly??
Again, this isn?t a right being granted to the holder, he is permitted to perform the work as he sees fit. None of these rights are granted to the holder by copyright law; they exist independently. What copyright law does is take away the rights of everyone else to do these things.
http://wiki.fuwanovel.org/index.php/Copyright_is_Not_a_Natural_Inalienable_Human_Right
Insane......
This is disgusting tyranny.
I want to add one more point
I'll just quote Cory Doctorow:
?What should other artists do? Well, I?m not really bothered. The sad truth is that almost every artist who tries to earn money will fail. This has nothing to do with the internet, of course. Consider the remarkable statement from Alanis Morissette?s attorney at the Future of Music Conference: 97% of the artists signed to a major label before Napster earned $600 or less a year from it. And these were the lucky lotto winners, the tiny fraction of 1% who made it to a record deal. Almost every artist who sets out to earn a living from art won?t get there (for me, it took 19 years before I could afford to quit my day job), whether or not they give away their work, sign to a label, or stick it through every letterbox in Zone 1.?
- Cory Doctorow
http://sharingisliberty.wordpress.com/tag/cory-doctorow/
Also consider,
Jim C Hines?s 2010 survey of novelists: "The average time an author spent writing BEFORE a sale is 11 years!"
http://sharingisliberty.wordpress.com/2012/07/18/the-average-time-an-author-spent-writing-before-a-sale-is-11-years/
Similar breakdown
Hey this is the VERY idea I wanted to capture in this article, except less elegantly than Zachary:
Formula to making money as an Artist on the Net.
The formula to profit on the net is this:
1) More access to content = more fans
2) More fans = more true fans
3) More true fans = more money
Daniel Cook article is beautiful. We ALL owe him one.
This is how it works:
The formula to profit on the net is this:
1) More access to content = more fans
2) More fans = more true fans
3) More true fans = more money
http://sharingisliberty.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/formula-to-making-money-as-an-artist-on-the-net/
criticism of libertarianism
"My criticism of libertarianism has always been...but they're completely blind to the fact that privately owned entities are prone to do the same thing" [/quote]
therefore it comes to pass that the best way to solve the problem of small government or big government must be to look thoroughly through the whole of history to find out what worked best? Do we agree on that?
There is not a mistake left under the sun that humans have not already committed. The answers are already there. You can theorize all day, but theory alone will not arrive at the answer. What do you think?