On Wednesday 30 June 2010 13:12:05 Paul Davis wrote: > the claim here is that the development of an idea before it is > expressed is a form of work. if the work is to be rewarded, its either > going to be done before, at or after the point at which an expression > of the idea is released into the world. before: will work without any copyright law at: will work without any copyright law after: might work some without any copyright law but probably very problematic. > because copying the expression > is so easy, its not easy to see how one can ensure sufficient revenue > from the release to make it feasible for the artist to *work* as an > artist. So, you think that the before and at options are not viable? > > i'm fine (to some extent) with the conclusion that we, as a society, > no longer wish to pay artists & creatives to do what they do. but if > that's really going to be the conclusion, we'd better think very > carefully about all the side effects. i'm not sure its pretty, and it > may be even less pretty than the world in which disney and sonny bono > get everything they ask for. This I seriously doubt. Putting someone off the internet for *being accused* of violating copyright three times is way over the top. Putting someone in jail for 4 or 5 years because they thought they were buying a legit CD and were ripped off by the seller is way over the top. Making someone sell their home to pay for the "damage" incurred by a big corp (or you) when the person's child did some song swapping on the net is way over the top. all the best, drew _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
