On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 22:22:45 +1200, Peter wrote:
> Yes - the copyright / patent thing has gone too far. The original idea
> AFAIK was to ensure that the artist / creator got a fair income for his
> work, and didn't lose out 'cos someone copied his work.
No, that is incorrect.
The original idea of copyright was to protect publishers. This is why it is
called 'copyright' - the right to copy. It's not called 'authorright'...
Authors back then were seldom payed or payed poorly. In this, nothing much
has changed - only the famous creators of works command a fair deal.
Everyone else is a resource to be exploited.
The biggest lie in this debate is that it is for the authors. It never has
been. It'll all about the publishers, distributors - they do not give a
rats arse about the authors, never have done, but they say they do because
their marketing psychologists told them this will shame people into
supporting their outdated business models.
The same is true for Patents: They do not protect the inventors, because
the big corporations have thousands of silly little patents any one of
which you are BOUND to cross with your invention - the corps then sue you
in Court for years until you are bankrupted, and buy the patent from the
liquidator and use it against the next inventor.
--
.... Brendan
#261501 +(5732)- [X]
<jeebus> the "bishop" came to our church today
<jeebus> he was a ****en impostor
<jeebus> never once moved diagonally
Note: All my comments are copyright 5/08/2006 11:36:43 p.m. and are opinion only where not otherwise stated and always "to the best of my recollection".
www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
Similar Threads
