You've got to be kidding me.

willietheshakes · Jan 20, 2010

DrZoidberg said:
That's not the point is it?

I'm not sure anymore -- it seemed to be your point (or one of them) for a while there...

Mr Flibble · Jan 20, 2010

DrZoidberg said:
That's not the point is it?

You said it was, I thought. If immorality / unfairness isn't the point, what is?

willietheshakes · Jan 20, 2010

icerose said:
Yay, another thread about copyright.

Here's my feelings. If you're so pathetic that you can't come up with your own story and have to try and steal my work to make a profit for you, that's pathetic.

Play in your own world. It's mine, I created it, back off and go be greedy somewhere else, because I have a right to my own creation far and above what you do.

Because that's what it is. It's plain greed. You want something that doesn't belong to you and think the laws should change so you can have it. Too bad, go cry to someone else.

*you being a general you*

*swoon*

I think I'm in love...

SPMiller · Jan 20, 2010

The Baen article is decent, if you get around to reading it. Then again, the folks at Baen are known in the spec fic genres to be more liberal than most, so take it with whatever grains or pinches or spoonfuls of salt necessary.

Perks · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
I'm not sure it's as subjective as you think. In writerly terms, the movies, especially the first one, were plain bad. Also, adjusting for inflation, Episode 4 was vastly more successful (by a factor of more than two) than Episode 1. Lucas killed his baby.

Otherwise, I agree "his" work should still be under copyright because he's still alive, though it's questionable just how much a movie is the product of a single man's effort.

A) Yes, if the bottom line of the accounting ledger is the ultimate determination of worth. (I think episodes 4-6 are much better, too, but there are plenty who disagree.)

B) I imagine the people who worked on the Star Wars films got paid. If they didn't, I'm sure they are or did sue. That's not a copyright issue.

SPMiller · Jan 20, 2010

Perks said:
A) Yes, if the bottom line of the accounting ledger is the ultimate determination of worth. (I think episodes 4-6 are much better, too, but there are plenty who disagree.)

Er, isn't that the working assumption of a free market? Or are you arguing a free market might not be the best way to do things? (Not that I'd necessarily disagree...)

Perks · Jan 20, 2010

Free market and artistic merit have never been study-buddies.

CaroGirl · Jan 20, 2010

icerose said:
Yay, another thread about copyright.

Here's my feelings. If you're so pathetic that you can't come up with your own story and have to try and steal my work to make a profit for you, that's pathetic.

Play in your own world. It's mine, I created it, back off and go be greedy somewhere else, because I have a right to my own creation far and above what you do.

Because that's what it is. It's plain greed. You want something that doesn't belong to you and think the laws should change so you can have it. Too bad, go cry to someone else.

*you being a general you*

This.

And what does 30 years have to do with anything? That's hardly a lifetime. If an author created something at the age of 20 that other people wanted to exploit 30 years later, that author would be only 50 years old. Does he no longer have the right to profit from his own idea so he can keep paying bills and saving for his imminent retirement? How about his children?

willietheshakes · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
The Baen article is decent, if you get around to reading it. Then again, the folks at Baen are known in the spec fic genres to be more liberal than most, so take it with whatever grains or pinches or spoonfuls of salt necessary.

Yeah, I don't agree...

I got to the part where he was arguing that any Stephen King work older than 14 years shouldn't be covered by copyright because King didn't need it and my head just about blew up.

Seriously?

Because King is successful, ANYONE should be able to remake Carrie, or Misery? Really?

SPMiller · Jan 20, 2010

Perks said:
Free market and artistic merit have never been study-buddies.

Artistic merit doesn't pay the bills.

Mr Flibble · Jan 20, 2010

willietheshakes said:
Yeah, I don't agree...

I got to the part where he was arguing that any Stephen King work older than 14 years shouldn't be covered by copyright because King didn't need it and my head just about blew up.

Seriously?

Because King is successful, ANYONE should be able to remake Carrie, or Misery? Really?

Yeah, I mean if say I started a restaurant, no one would have a problem with me running it and making money for as long as I liked and passing it on to my kids so they can make money. No one would say 'Oh, that's not fair, you should give away the food for free because it's old now'

Why should this be any different, just because it's fictional worlds / characters I've created, not a secret spaghetti sauce or an awesome ambience?

SPMiller · Jan 20, 2010

All right. Let's approach this from another angle. I'd like to see a good argument for why copyright should last beyond a creator's death.

Mr Flibble · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
All right. Let's approach this from another angle. I'd like to see a good argument for why copyright should last beyond a creator's death.

Tell me why I shouldn't will a creation of mine to my kids?

Perks · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
Artistic merit doesn't pay the bills.

Absolutely. And I'm not against getting paid. All I'm saying is that best-grossing and best are not congruent concepts.

Anyway, sorry for the derail. It's not important in this discussion.

I got to the part where he was arguing that any Stephen King work older than 14 years shouldn't be covered by copyright because King didn't need it and my head just about blew up.

Jesus. So, should we stop paying everyone after their basic needs are paid for?

CaroGirl · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
All right. Let's approach this from another angle. I'd like to see a good argument for why copyright should last beyond a creator's death.

MY creation is my children's birthright, NOT yours.

Shadow_Ferret · Jan 20, 2010

Priene said:
If you believe you shouldn't have the right to make money off someone else's work, then you should support copyright expiring on an author's death.

This makes no sense to me. If I believe no one should have the right to make money off of my work, why would I want copyright to expire upon my death? Then EVERYONE will make money on it. I'd want it to be part of an estate owned indefinitely by either my family or a pack a rabid lawyers who signed some sort of agreement with me prior to my death.

SPMiller · Jan 20, 2010

IdiotsRUs said:
Tell me why I shouldn't will a creation of mine to my kids?

CaroGirl said:
MY creation is my children's birthright, NOT yours.

What about their kids? Should your artistic creations be heirlooms of a sort, to be passed down any number of generations? If so, why? If not, why not?

(By the way, I'm not going to agree with your answers. I just like making you think

)

Williebee · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
All right. Let's approach this from another angle. I'd like to see a good argument for why copyright should last beyond a creator's death.

My uncle designed a comfy bed and sold it to the furniture stores. He did very well. Now the comfy bed company belongs to his son, who is doing fairly well with it as well. He could have just lived off the profits made, but instead he made more beds, thus ensuring that his children had a comfy bed store of their own some day.

Or should we rather give those comfy beds, and thereby that company's customers away to the neighbors and the strangers across the state?

Now, for how long should we wait before that comfy bed design is free for others to use or try to improve? (beats me).

Celia Cyanide · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
I'm not sure it's as subjective as you think. In writerly terms, the movies, especially the first one, were plain bad. Also, adjusting for inflation, Episode 4 was vastly more successful (by a factor of more than two) than Episode 1. Lucas killed his baby.

I'm not sure how any of this matters. IMO, the Twilight books are plain bad. That doesn't mean I can decide I'm going to write a story about those characters, but better, and sell it. It would get attention, simply because the characters are well known, but they're not mine.

For whatever reason, people like those stories and the characters. Certainly, I would say that a lot of it is luck and not talent. Makes no difference. They're still not mine. Lucas may be destroying the Star Wars franchise, but it is still HIS to destroy.

CaroGirl · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
What about their kids? Should your artistic creations be heirlooms of a sort, to be passed down any number of generations? If so, why? If not, why not?

(By the way, I'm not going to agree with your answers. I just like making you think )

Yes. Because it's mine to decide to do with what I want. If I want the profit from my creation to go to my kids, it damn well should. What they, or their children, want to do with it is then up to them. If they want sell their stake in it, so be it. But it's no one's decision but mine, and theirs in turn.

ETA: That last sentence you added is just annoying.

Why do you want to take other people's stuff so badly? Wouldn't you rather focus on coming up with something yourself that someone else might want to steal? What if you worked your ass off to create something so popular, everyone wanted a piece of it? Would you give it away piece by piece or would you want to hold onto it?

icerose · Jan 20, 2010

SPMiller said:
What about their kids? Should your artistic creations be heirlooms of a sort, to be passed down any number of generations? If so, why? If not, why not?

(By the way, I'm not going to agree with your answers. I just like making you think )[/QUOTE]

Bolding mine.

So basically you're just trolling. Either participate in the discussion or back out, quit baiting people so you can "make them think".

SPMiller · Jan 20, 2010

What discussion? It's more of a dogpile, really, with the vast majority angrily behind one perspective. But I'll leave, no problem.

Celia Cyanide · Jan 20, 2010

Perks said:
Jesus. So, should we stop paying everyone after their basic needs are paid for?

Yeah, that would be bad news for those of use who have jobs and write on the side...

Mr Flibble · Jan 20, 2010

Williebee said:
Now, for how long should we wait before that comfy bed design is free for others to use or try to improve? (beats me).

Exactly.Why shoudl it be different for fictional creations than for say, the secret of a salad dressing? Or should the company that makes it be non-profit, or the sauce recipe become public domain once the invented it dies? ( like, say Paul Newman) IF i make a quilt, it can be handed down through generations.

Fictional worlds/ characters are no different to a physical thing. Just because you can't hold it physically ( outside of the actual book say) doesn't mean it isn't property

hence the term intellectual property.

Or the other way round, right back at SP: Why should anyone benefit from what I've done without my say so ( even if that say so is in a will)?

Perks · Jan 20, 2010

Celia Cyanide said:
I'm not sure how any of this matters. IMO, the Twilight books are plain bad. <snip>

For whatever reason, people like those stories and the characters.

It also like asking, "What's the best car?" Surely the best-selling car does not definitively decide the actual best car. Likely there is no such thing. Gah. I'm off the point again. But this is an annoying thing. It's just a simplistic-working-on-lazy assertion that something that sells more is in any way inherently better than its competitors or contemporaries. Sometimes it's better, sometimes a pie chart will prove that it's not, many times, it's only a matter of opinion.

You've got to be kidding me.

Gentleman. Scholar. Bastard.

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

Gentleman. Scholar. Bastard.

Prodigiously Hanged

delicate #!&@*#! flower

Prodigiously Hanged

delicate #!&@*#! flower

Living the dream

Gentleman. Scholar. Bastard.

Prodigiously Hanged

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

Prodigiously Hanged

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

delicate #!&@*#! flower

Living the dream

Court Jester

Prodigiously Hanged

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

Joker Groupie

Living the dream

Lost in School Work

Prodigiously Hanged

Joker Groupie

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

delicate #!&@*#! flower