Re: Ghost Works survey - Chilling effects of copyright

"Marc Adler" <marc.adler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:89fa9ed6-f011-4ebe-872e-456766f4de37@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 27, 12:41 am, "Stuart" <smcg4...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

The recipient of the copyright or patent.

Oh, I see. But note that I'm specifically drawing a distinction
between copyright and patent. I fully understand the need for patents
to expire. I just don't see how the same thinking applies to
copyright.

Some kinds of artistic innovation certainly build on what was
done earlier. Consider the use of samples by hip-hop and other
audio artists. Or You-tube mashups. Why can't I, as a painter,
express my creative vision by incorporating in my work an image
of an enigmatically smiling Mona Lisa?

The fact that all the things you mention are happening now shows that
the system is working, though, right? Sampling is a staple of hip-hop.
It's hard to call a system broken if the results you want to see are
the results you're seeing. Do you see what I'm getting at?

"Working"? I'm sure that if patents didn't expire you
would still see invention and could describe the system
as "working". Are you saying that there would be no
difference in creative output under a system with infinite
copyrights vs the current time-limited one, and claiming
that the fact that there is a significant amount creative
output in the commercial hip-hop world is proof of this?

Ignoring that you seem to be using observations of the
current time-limited system to argue that a different,
infinite-time system would work equally well, I agree in
the case of hip-hop that it is plausible that most of the
samples in use are still under copyright but I have
read a number of news stories about young artists who
ran into problems with samples and copyright. Clearly
commercial music can afford to pay royalties but that
ignores the benefit to society of access to innovative
forms of music that aren't commercially viable.

Sean pointed out a better example. In the contemporary
folk-music scene there is a huge amount of borrowing
from traditional music. If all this source material
required royalty payments it is hard to imagine that
the genre would exist in the same form it does today.

As for the painting, I'm pretty sure you can include the Mona Lisa in
a larger drawing. You can't (well, you can because, the Mona Lisa is
now in the public domain, so let's use another example -- something by
Edward Hopper, say) copy "Nighthawks" stroke-for-stroke, color-for-
color, call it "Nighthawks," and try to sell it,

Is the copyright on a painting different from the copyright
on say a Microsoft image? Could I include the latter in my
painting without permission from Microsoft?

but I can't think of
anyone except some idea-less MFA students who would think that that's
innovative.

Yes, perhaps art would be better if society formulated
it's laws to encourage "good" art and discourage "bad" art.

Either way, I didn't say that there isn't "progress" in the arts. I
said there isn't the kind of progress that is defined by "improvement"
which you see in technology. Your post-Apocalyptic vision of the
blasted rubble of the Louvre with a pristine Mona Lisa hovering
angelically above it isn't necessarily better than the Mona Lisa
itself, even if it incorporates that painting. "De gustibus non est
disputandum" (is that the term I'm looking for?), but that doesn't
apply to my cell phone, which is clearly better than the one I owned
six years ago.

So you feel that "improvement" of the protectable works
is the only societal benefit that justifies limitations
on copyright?

Other kinds of innovation besides artistic are important too.
Indexing previously published works and making them available
over the internet in electronic form, for example.

That's certainly very useful, and I applaud Google's efforts. Also,
note that I'm _not_ saying copyright law is perfect. Indeed, my
contention is that it should be modified to extend copyright
infinitely. Even if Google indexes all these books, as long as it
doesn't make them all available to the public in their entirety, I
don't think there will be a conflict with current law, however.

You see no difference in the benefit to society of
having only indexes vs indexes plus content available
on the internet?

[...]

You're not an artist, are you? :-)

Nope. I don't even benefit from copyright (or at least, I can't hope
to in any realistic sense), but it's the principle of the thing.
Further, it's mostly the big corporations who benefit from copyright
expiring, since they can then turn around and use famous works of art
(for example) in advertisements. The little man doesn't gain anything,
and the little man who is the artist himself loses everything.

"Loses everything"? He has the gain from a 50 year (or
lifetime or whatever) monopoly.

I'm not sure I agree with your theory that large corporations
benefit the most, either. Ability to use famous works in
ads is nice, but there are many other factors including that
(I speculate) there are far more copyrights in corporate
hands than in the hands of your "little man".

just one scenario, of course, but I still haven't come across any
arguments re the benefit to society on par with arguments for the
patent system.

Just moved the goalposts. didn't we? You asked for benefits
to society of time-limited copyright. Now it is benefits on
a par with the patent system. I don't see why that should
be automatically presumed to be the bar.

However after thinking about the issues a little more, I
think the benefits to society are on a par with patents.
The main benefit is the greater distribution of artistic
works in society that results when copyright no longer
restricts distribution of the works.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ghost Works survey - Chilling effects of copyright
    ... But note that I'm specifically drawing a distinction ... between copyright and patent. ... audio artists. ... of an enigmatically smiling Mona Lisa? ...
    (sci.lang.japan)
  • Re: Try living is Iran...
    ... The mundane identities of even people who post using ... accounts in their Society name are often easily known. ... congratulations on conning the United States Patent Office ...
    (rec.org.sca)
  • Re: Try living is Iran...
    ... it means "however smart you are" in this context? ... Actually, when I introduce myself to anyone in the SCA, ... > (which sort of goes against Society tradition) ... congratulations on conning the United States Patent Office ...
    (rec.org.sca)
  • Re: Regarding MP3 support
    ... >> original owners or have themselves acquired full distribution rights. ... > development of any kind, so that society as hole can benefit from it, ... > Americans had allowed software patents before it was clear that it was ... > the money they can make on patent applications which are rather ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Just how dead are SACD and DVD-A?
    ... I meant business use of the patent by the owner of the patent rather ... >> than the owner becoming a patent troll and sitting on the good idea and ... > Yes, or a drugs company who is happy to let thousands of people die, go ... society of protecting the inventor, so he can continue to invent for the ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
Loading