chickwithaninvisibledick: "Those poor brainwashed people who are rejoicing about the death of some low-life terrorist leader as though terrorism ends with his death."
Well, I liked seeing him dead, but I don't think that is the end of "terrorism". How can I get "un-brainwashed" and be as good in this regard as you? And does this mean we should continue with an endless war on "terrorism"?
"In other words, even if people did want to properly license the music playing in their background while making a home video of their toddler dancing, it's probably not even possible."
And that's how they want it. The goal isn't just to "get money", they goal is to CONTROL the culture, to PREVENT people from using things, to just turn people into dumb mindless consumers that do nothing but consume the material and use it in one way and one way ONLY. And finally they put the licensing fees and royalties up to silly amounts to clinch the matter.
"Why not embrace these efforts as evidence of fan interest in the film, and use it to generate even more interest? Even if the amateur work isn't good or flattering, just the fact that people would bother to try to recreate it suggests an interest in the film. Encouraging more people to do so gets the idea out there that the original is a film worth seeing. After all, no one spends time making their own versions of films no one cares about."
They could do that right now, without even changing the law. Just grant explicit, written permission to the fans to do so (make a noncommercial net film or something) if they ask for it. This obviously requires a good change in the psychology of the people running studios.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by mike3.
Re: Re:
chickwithaninvisibledick: "Those poor brainwashed people who are rejoicing about the death of some low-life terrorist leader as though terrorism ends with his death."
Well, I liked seeing him dead, but I don't think that is the end of "terrorism". How can I get "un-brainwashed" and be as good in this regard as you? And does this mean we should continue with an endless war on "terrorism"?
Controlling the culture.
"In other words, even if people did want to properly license the music playing in their background while making a home video of their toddler dancing, it's probably not even possible."
And that's how they want it. The goal isn't just to "get money", they goal is to CONTROL the culture, to PREVENT people from using things, to just turn people into dumb mindless consumers that do nothing but consume the material and use it in one way and one way ONLY. And finally they put the licensing fees and royalties up to silly amounts to clinch the matter.
They don't even need to change the law.
"Why not embrace these efforts as evidence of fan interest in the film, and use it to generate even more interest? Even if the amateur work isn't good or flattering, just the fact that people would bother to try to recreate it suggests an interest in the film. Encouraging more people to do so gets the idea out there that the original is a film worth seeing. After all, no one spends time making their own versions of films no one cares about."
They could do that right now, without even changing the law. Just grant explicit, written permission to the fans to do so (make a noncommercial net film or something) if they ask for it. This obviously requires a good change in the psychology of the people running studios.