Posts by Steve Barnes
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I saw an article on TV3 last night about This. Whole new can of worms eh? but look on the bright side. How many times, I wonder, have publishers ordered a new print run only to sell a few dozen copies instead of the thousands they estimated? This could be a boon for both sides.
-
So it was some other Giovanni Tiso who wrote:
One of the responses to this changed environment has been to claim that copyright is too restrictive anyhow, and not serving society nor the creators, so let's do away with it, take the guilt out of the downloading and embrace the new.Now come on Mark, he did say "One of the responses" Which I, at least, read as "what has been claimed by others" so Giovanni was not stating his own position but his observation of the position of others.
Please correct me if I'm wrong Gio. -
I meaned menat
-
And thanks Steve. Yeah, typo, I menat simple. (work that out!)
menat, fnahh fnahh
-
Interesting. Investing in "dying" cultures would surely be a self defeating fallacy, no?
-
Here's a thought.
If I wrote a book, had it published and then edited it significantly and re-published and then some blighter nicks a passage that appears in both publications. Do I get double royalties or have I broken my own copyright.? -
And I broke my
Quote
Where is that EDIT BUTTON?
-
quote>that unlimited copying will result- not now, maybe not for decades- in a culture where great new content TO copy gets scarce. That's another culture of scarcity.</quote>I believe this is a fallacy
. Music, for instance, changes constantly, just look at what has been "Number One on the Charts" over the years, the "style" of the content has changed significantly. To take your point to a logical conclusion would suggest that the creation of music is driven by demand and that demand can be satisfied by copying existing works. This is plainly not the case. As in all creative endeavours the production of something new is the goal. As with the current discussions about the cost of News gathering vis a vis the cost of News reporting and distribution, the discussion of creative Arts should encompass this concept too.
There has been little discussion of the role of the creative in this area, we have touched on the perceived cost or loss to the Artist but not his reason for existence. There is always, or should be, something more than material gain as a reason for living. Do we consider thew possibility that the Artist may, indeed, have an Ego, he may find a desire in being first, a competitive desire perhaps?As with the News gathering discussion, there should be some recompense for being first to market. This concept is recognised in current copyright law but, as Mark would surely agree, the length of copyright is the real area to address.
I think. Anyway, I'll be here for a while, I'll just grab a beer. The copyright thread is a good a place as any to hang out on a wet Sunday when you're barred from your local Pub but that is another story.
;-) -
Yeah, digital content is dead simply to multiply.
And say stuff that makes no sense at all. What does this mean?Er, "digital content is dead simple to copy".
-
Mark Harris, why didn't you post that on page one? It would have saved a lot of copy, right?
;-)
fnah