Posts by Islander
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
ScottY - you've nicely, succinctly, summed the matter up.
-
Actually Mark H, fuck off. I'm very tired of this discussion which is not providing anything truly new and has gone far too long. Kati. Heoi.
-
Steve Barnes - what on *earth* makes you think a writer is disasociated from the *material* side of things, mate?
I am an animal: I need food, water, etc. I am also an animal that dreams & creates stuff. Materialist = material as far as I am concerned, and that 'bliss' that Kerry mentioned CANNOT happen without the materialist backup - so, like, we dont die? -
Geez giovanni - a lot of your blog is poetry! Talented is a given when someone is an expert in their field-
-
O well said Kerry! (By the way,every working creative person has periods of stasis- which are storing-up-honey times, either to make sublime mead or blow-yer-head-off spritzy crank.)
I think people who do not engage in this - life pursuit- put up a lot of Mark H's arguments - hey, it makes money, copyright should be severely limited -or extinguished-
(I think it should be limited to the term it is presently, and no rancidity about it Mark)
and there's an infinite supply of creative folk out there so what the fuck are we bothering about all this copyright shit?Well, actually, there *arnt* an infinite supply of creative folk out there-
-
giovanni - ARRRGH!
Time to pull up the lagoon drawbridge, arm the shotgun towers, eye all visiters *really* suspiciously and - where the phuque did I put that Tamiflu??? -
Steve Barnes - no, actually, the practice hasnt been abused: Fowler found a large section of his reading public irritated by changes he made, and the second version didnt sell well (an author in this country has found the same thing.) I find the idea of rewriting something I've published tremendously resistable: whatever flaws a more mature writer recognises in earlier work, the work exists as the earlier writer made it (after a very great deal of rewriting incidentally.)
-
Steve Barnes, you hold copyright in your work from the time it is created (let alone published.) You own copyright in both versions of your work (John Fowles is a significant example of a writer who edited & republished) and you will indeed get royalties for each version (provided the contract between your publisher & yourself allows for this.) And the person who nicks any part of either work is eminently sueable-
-
icehawk, you're setting up straw people. I havent argued either stance you're proposing - and wouldnt.
-
Stephen Judd - restorative justice is rather different from utu: very different in fact. People - victims/whanau thereof/criminals are required to sit down together and find a way where all parties feel the matter can be/is resolved.
I said to my sister, You're on a hiding to nothing. And so it proved to be. Restorative justice doesnt actually work in the majority of cases - because about 10% of offenders are predators on the 90% of us (and a worrying 2-3% of the predators are psychopaths or sociopaths.)
Utu worked in times gone by - until the balance/s got tipped. The musket was one undeniable major tipping force.
We cannot go back to past solutions - the good examples you have given show why.
BUT- until ordinary people know that they can have a decisive imput into the sentences of criminals who have killed or grossly harmed their whanau - and when & where they are released - I'd suggest 'the law' will continue to be held in disrespect, if not contempt.
It's a bit like the numerous financial exploiters still partying around -until they're out there in sackcloth & ashes, digging shit into the ground, nobody is going to believe in a just financial system again.