this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
1343 points (95.6% liked)

memes

10220 readers
1512 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (4 children)

What a weird stance that you don't think anyone should be able to be compensated for their work. That's literally what the purpose of copyright is.

[–] Malfeasant@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Actually that's not the purpose of copyright - people would be able to profit without copyright. You can argue about how much or how little they could profit, or how much more or less convenient it would be to consume their work. The purpose of copyright is to limit this period of exclusivity, and ensure that after the period expires, ownership reverts to the people. It's a trade- government allows exclusive profit on the condition that it is temporary.

The problem is copyright has been perverted over the last hundred years, mostly by Disney, to the point that it is effectively permanent.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 1 points 9 months ago

>That’s literally what the purpose of copyright is.

the purpose of copyrigth is to stop 18th century british printers from breaking each others' knees over who was allowed to publish the works of long-dead shakespeare

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Where did I say that strawman?

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You want to do away with copyright. Maybe think a bit harder about the implications of the things you think you want.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Maybe you can point out where I said what you claimed I said. I want to see it. Not what you choose to infer because strawman arguments are easier than actual arguments.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Maybe you can point out where I said what you claimed I said.

I guess I'll just reply with your own comment:

It isn’t about what the charges are it is about what people think. If we redefined the crime of murder as “foo” and charged people the same way it isn’t like murder went away.

Whatever value copyright was supposed to give us it has failed to do so. Abolish it.

Maybe you don't actually know what abolish means?

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

that you don’t think anyone should be able to be compensated for their work.

Point to the comment that I advocated this.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

How is someone going to be compensated for their creative work if anyone can come along and just make copies of it? Copyright prevents people from just making copies of other people's work. You want to do away with copyright, thus removing that protection and severely hindering the ability of anyone to make money from creative works.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Point to the comment that I advocated this.

Why can't you admit that you lied? It is fairly easy

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 1 points 9 months ago

>you don’t think anyone should be able to be compensated for their work.

that's not what they said. no one is saying that.