|
|
|
|
|
|
by ly3xqhl8g9
1081 days ago
|
|
|
Hope at least you are getting paid and you don't deploy such ridiculous amounts of bad faith for free. My reply from above "Most of them already don't get paid, hence the strike" was specifically in the context of the streaming platforms not paying residuals in the same manner the studios do, hence the reference to the article. What I find most funny is that you don't even know or care about alternative solutions, you just assume the copyright laws is for the best in the best of all possible worlds [1] and anything else would be chaos. [1] Tout est pour le mieux dans le meilleur des mondes possibles, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candide |
|
|
And yet instead of addressing my actual objection - that screenwriters seeking to get paid more for co-creating IP would be unlikely to see abolition of IP protection as a solution - by articulating those alternatives and how it would allow them to get paid more, you chose to assert they don't get paid.[1]
I mean, I'm not the one advocating the radical change here, even though actually I don't "assume that the copyright laws is for the best in the best of all possible worlds". So it's not really incumbent on me to answer my own objections by imagining screenwriter-satisfying solutions involving the abolition of copyright. If you actually had one and were able to advocate it with as much zeal as you have defended the claim "most of them already don't get paid" this might be a more interesting discussion.
[1]doesn't really matter if you were doing so "specifically in the context of streaming platform residuals" since whether or not they get residuals from a particular media type is irrelevant to the fact screenwriters are not in favour of proposals which would entail them losing both the residuals they do get and their job