I gave a long, reasoned argument. It's telling that this is all you can say to counter it.
You don't take power from corporations by removing rights from individuals.
UK Green Party proposed cutting copyright to 14 years
- Thread starter aruna
- Start date
- Status
Interesting question. To be honest, I have no idea. But intuitively, the contract should terminate when someone dies. I do know however that contract law can be far from intuitive.
I will note though, that I am all for people voluntarily putting works into the public domain, or using any Creative Commons license that allows commercial fan-fiction. I think every creator should have that right to control their own work.
[/QUOTE]
Considering how easy it can be to file fraudulent or legally-unsound DMCA takedown notices, I don't think that would necessarily be a good thing. It can be hard to make people comply with takedown notices, but it's obscenely easy to file claims.
I also have a serious problem with putting people in prison for copyright infringement when our system is so overtaxed to begin with. I would not want that on my shoulders as an artist. Plus, it is the big corporations that would abuse this and, say, lock up a fifteen-year-old for using a Beyonce song in a YouTube.
I also shudder to think of the effect on freedom of speech. Imagine spending months or years in jail while you fight to prove that a negative review you wrote constituted fair use, or that a story you wrote is protected as a parody.
Going to the police to file a complaint would set a higher bar in my opinion.
I haven't said anything about prison at all. (Although I think it should be used in blatant cases of copyright theft.)*
I certainly haven't advocated throwing people in prison before they went to trial, as they would have to be in the example of your last paragraph. (And both those examples are of things that are already allowed under current copyright.)
*I don't think a discussion on the prison-industrial complex belongs in a copyright discussion. But I think there is a lot of people in prison around the world who should not be there.
The problem there is deciding what counts as blatant.
There are certainly people who intentionally profit off copyrighted works, like people who set up websites to share pirated ebooks. But most copyright infringement is a lot more subtle and arguably better-intentioned.
Well, unless they're released on their own recognizance, a lot of people stay in jail while awaiting trial because they can't afford bail. It could be very easy to abuse that. And until someone is arraigned, it's hard to know sometimes if charges will stick.
It's not that hard for me to imagine a petty author having someone arrested for writing a bad book review that included briefs quotes, for example. That could easily derail a person's life while things were sorted out. It would definitely make me hesitant to continue doing reviews.
That is what I mean by blatant. Planned profiteering from knowingly ignoring copyright law.
In most countries people are only remained in custody because they are either a physical danger, or because they are constantly re-commiting the same crime and having them walking around just facilitates that.
People who are awaiting murder trials are routinely released from custody. (Although they may have to pay for it in some countries.)
Writing a bad book review, even with quotes, is within current copyright.
I am actually suggesting, like they already do with all other crimes reported to them, that the police actually do investigate the accusation before taking any action.
In cases as frivilous as the the book review example you mentioned, the person accused would never even hear about it because the police would just have to take a quick look at the review to see that the accusation had no basis.
However, in countries were wasting police time is a crime, someone making such frivilous accusations may themselves get in trouble with the authorities.
I suppose if the copyright trolls that hounded Greg Ham to death had managed to have him thrown in gaol instead, he might still be alive.
Srsly? Gaol terms for copyright infringement? How would this lead to anything other than a cartoonish corporate dystopia? I'd be up river for life for the amount of photocopying I did during my student years alone.
Srsly? Gaol terms for copyright infringement? How would this lead to anything other than a cartoonish corporate dystopia? I'd be up river for life for the amount of photocopying I did during my student years alone.
In the U.S., it can really vary. It's pretty common for people to be held at bail even if they're not particularly dangerous or are only accused of petty crimes.
Also, in the U.S. system, I would say that it's generally much easier, from the perspective of the accuser, to bring charges against someone than it is to take them to civil court. Obviously, not all criminal complaints result in charges or a court case, but there's very little risk involved in accusing someone of a crime because unless you perjure yourself or clearly make a false or bad-faith accusation, there's no legal consequence for making a criminal accusation that doesn't pan out.
In the civil system, people are responsible for bringing lawsuits against someone. You have to file the paperwork, compile the evidence, and pay court fees. You have to pay for an attorney if you want to be represented by one. Though there are plenty of frivolous lawsuits, I think the amount of responsibility you take on when you file a suit helps discourage completely frivolous claims.
The only upside I could see to trying copyright infringement in criminal court would be that the accused would be entitled to legal representation. As it is, a lot of people never defend themselves against frivolous claims of infringement because hiring an attorney and fighting is more difficult than obeying a cease and desist.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 22,289
- Reaction score
- 1,491
Yeah, I'm just thinking about how this would end up in arresting 99.99% of the population between about 15 and 25? I guess we never needed them, anyway.
The amount of manpower of getting into everybody's homes, confiscating all of their computer equipment and finding every illegal thing they've downloaded and torrented... I don't know. It's pretty sickening just to think about. We already have all sorts of insane justification for police with nebulous reasons for drug searches. We really, really don't need another reason for police to have 'probable cause' to do things to people.
The amount of manpower of getting into everybody's homes, confiscating all of their computer equipment and finding every illegal thing they've downloaded and torrented... I don't know. It's pretty sickening just to think about. We already have all sorts of insane justification for police with nebulous reasons for drug searches. We really, really don't need another reason for police to have 'probable cause' to do things to people.
"You stand accused of photocopying, most heinous. It is alleged that on or about May the 15th you did reproduce a chapter on elasmobranchiid electrophysiology from a forty year old shark biology textbook, without paying due royalties to the rightful owner. How do you plead?"
"It's out of print and it was the only reference in exist--"
"Silence! You are found guilty, and for this crime you will hang by the neck until dead. Take the prisoner away. Send in the grandmother who sang an unlicensed rendition of Happy Birthday To You at her grandson's 1st birthday."
"It's out of print and it was the only reference in exist--"
"Silence! You are found guilty, and for this crime you will hang by the neck until dead. Take the prisoner away. Send in the grandmother who sang an unlicensed rendition of Happy Birthday To You at her grandson's 1st birthday."
This is completely untrue. To get someone charged with a criminal offense, you need to get an indictment, and that's not a process any individual can pursue against anyone else. You need the cooperation of a prosecutor.
On the other hand, an individual can sue any other individual, for just about anything alleged. All you need is an attorney. The U.S. court system is awash in civil litigation all the time.
caw
No, I'm not saying that it's easy to take someone to court. I'm saying it's very easy to go to the police and make a criminal complaint against someone. Like I said, such complaints don't always result in charges or a trial case. But unless you obviously lied to the police, there usually isn't any legal consequence for making a complaint against someone, even if it turns out that there's no case or that you misunderstood the law and the accused didn't actually break any laws. This makes sense because in a lot of cases, the police would rather people make a report "just in case" rather than stay silent and let a crime occur. And victims of crimes can't always prove what happened to them. But if you file a lawsuit, that takes some work and cost. That obviously doesn't stop people from filing some ridiculous lawsuits, but it's their loss when their case gets dismissed and they have to pay court and attorney fees for nothing.
Hi friends, just a little mod reminder here as we come back online: Please remember that everyone has strong opinions on this; it's a complex issue with many facets to be thrashed out; we are not all going to agree; we are probably not even all going to completely understand where the other(s) come from with their opinions differing from ours.
Hang onto your RYFW protective vests, okay?
Thanks much!
Hang onto your RYFW protective vests, okay?
Thanks much!
Well, since I specified I only advocated jailterms for:
Yep, all of this.
I'd add that to keep someone in custody awaiting trial in Norway, and most European countries as far as I know, you would not only have to get a prosecutor to agree the police evidence is strong enough for it, but the prosecutor then has to convince a judge of it
It would be helpful if anyone could link to the discussion where someone has advocated for throwing people photocopying, or illegally downloading for personal use, in jail.
Yep, all of this.
I'd add that to keep someone in custody awaiting trial in Norway, and most European countries as far as I know, you would not only have to get a prosecutor to agree the police evidence is strong enough for it, but the prosecutor then has to convince a judge of it
Probably a stupid question, but what if instead of changing copyright terms, there was a discussion about setting some kind of international standard for licensing agreements? If people really want to make all these derivative works, a framework for obtaining permission would make it much more feasible.
Might also be possible to piggyback a statutory payment system onto this for cases where the original copyright holder can't be found - sort of storing the money in case the copyright holder or their estate comes forward at a later date.
Might also be possible to piggyback a statutory payment system onto this for cases where the original copyright holder can't be found - sort of storing the money in case the copyright holder or their estate comes forward at a later date.
See, there are a lot of things outside of tinkering with copyright length that I think we could do that would solve more of our problems. And I think it's probably dangerous to tinker with copyright without addressing and solving some of the other problems first.
I can't agree more with the idea that writing is a completely different kind of profession than any other profession. The way we do the work is different, the way we get paid for the work is different... the way we don't get paid for the work is different. Before we go mucking around with copyright, these things need to be considered and addressed.
Also, I believe that patents and copyrights are completely different animals and shouldn't be linked at all... I really don't even think they should be talked about in the same conversation.
And I support libraries, second-hand shops, and lending books to friends.
.... and copyright violations should not be criminal.
What else....
Oh yeah, why is it specifically necessary to society that Mickey Mouse fall into the public domain? Or is Mickey Mouse just representative?
- Status