Re:Copyright doesn't need 95 years to get the job done
by tptacek on Monday January 03, 2022 @06:38PM
(#29788684)
Your argument across multiple comments doesn't cohere. You mention "good copyright" upthread, but here have somehow derived an innate right to record and reproduce anything you technically can, which is an argument that relitigates the entire premise of copyright, which is to artificially restrict that innate right in order to incentivize people to author new works.
Re:Copyright doesn't need 95 years to get the job done
by cies on Tuesday January 04, 2022 @03:54AM
(#29792753)
> You mention "good copyright"
That means short copyright, just enough to increase innovation.
> but here have somehow derived an innate right to record and reproduce anything you technically can
No, that's not a right, that just a technical ability. Copyright outlaw that ability.
> to artificially restrict that innate right in order to incentivize people to author new works.
Exactly that is what all IP law does imho.
You have! Then just don't publish/share/release it. Take it physically to your grave.
Once you publish it, I also have the "natural ability" to record it. Copyright limits my ability to record/reuse what I technically can by what is allowed. Copyright, and other IP rights have been sold as to give the original creators some head start which would make investing in such works more easy, in the end leading to a more rich commons for everyone.