Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
COPYRIGHT OR COPYLEFT, by Deleted on Apr 17, 2015 9:28:31 GMT 1, This issue is raised a few times a year where the same arguments are used against artists who appropriate certain aspects of pop culture imagery for their own work. Personally I think copyright law needs to be comprehensively reformed.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_copyright
This is a highly recommended documentary that covers some of this ground.
If a copyright debate develops on another thread, just direct it here.
This issue is raised a few times a year where the same arguments are used against artists who appropriate certain aspects of pop culture imagery for their own work. Personally I think copyright law needs to be comprehensively reformed. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_copyrightThis is a highly recommended documentary that covers some of this ground. If a copyright debate develops on another thread, just direct it here. |
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
COPYRIGHT OR COPYLEFT, by Deleted on Apr 17, 2015 9:49:04 GMT 1, Definately copyright.
That protects the small guy.
Patents and inventions is the same but different
For example if some person makes a film or book or art or a process invention or a drug company makes a life saving drug and want to give the book film art invention drug to the world for free. That is their choice.
However if some person creates someting original, book, film, music, art, and it is not copyrighted then what is to stop some big advertising agency, corporation selling shit to the public, Hollywood film mogul or other such people just taking the original from the individual that created it and making a lot of money off it and telling the person who created it to get fucked.
Copyleft as I have seen it is only good for propaganda purposes
Definately copyright.
That protects the small guy.
Patents and inventions is the same but different
For example if some person makes a film or book or art or a process invention or a drug company makes a life saving drug and want to give the book film art invention drug to the world for free. That is their choice.
However if some person creates someting original, book, film, music, art, and it is not copyrighted then what is to stop some big advertising agency, corporation selling shit to the public, Hollywood film mogul or other such people just taking the original from the individual that created it and making a lot of money off it and telling the person who created it to get fucked.
Copyleft as I have seen it is only good for propaganda purposes
|
|
