[sosborn]

> Maybe we could wait a bit for cool movies when technology advances to the point where they can be made by few dedicated people with off the shelf hardware instead hundred million budget that needs to be propped up with additional millions to trump up the hype so it can be earned back?

We aren't far away from that, but it's important to remember that creators now have the option to create without attaching copyright to a work. Copyright isn't mandatory. Creators tend to choose copyright because it is in their best interest.

Also, it isn't mandatory to consume copyrighted media. Just find something else that isn't encumbered by it if you wish.

[scotty79]

It also isn't mandatory to respect copyright. It's unenforceable and a lot of people ignore it happily.

> Creators tend to choose copyright because it is in their best interest.

And some peole choose to emit tons of CO2 because it's in their best intrest. The question is, is it in everybody's best interest.

A lot of people would be culturally poorer and more isolated if not for piracy and 100% secure copyrighted content wouldn't be as popular.

[sosborn]

Copyright is not equivalent to climate change.

What does it mean to be culturally poorer? Attaching importance to pop culture knowledge sounds like the real problem.

[scotty79]

Of course it is not. What I'm saying is, optimal economic decissions of some people might not be good for people in general. When it comes to copyright we can't consider only the good of the creators and people who paid creators.

Copyright is not just for popculture. Also learning materials, software and culture in general. Tonnes of people in the world got their higher education on pirated software and xeroxed books.