[jgrahamc]

That's not true. I rely on copyright as the foundation for lots of things (the code I write in my job and it underlies the OSS licenses that I use for code that I release freely). Copyright itself does not worry me.

But there are concerning moves to make copyright last essentially indefinitely and in the UK we've recently seen the Olympics be backed up by criminal rather than civil penalties for copyright-related offenses. Those things are worrying.

It is true that there's nothing in the original article about copyright or finance, but it is worth considering in the light of the fact that it's unlikely that the event or the other performers did this out of the goodness of their hearts. Follow the money.

[DanBC]

> in the UK we've recently seen the Olympics be backed up by criminal rather than civil penalties for copyright-related offenses.

Copyright infringement as part of trade has always been a criminal, not civil, matter in the UK.

[endtime]

Okay, but none of that is specific to this technology or its use at a concert. You just seem to be taking the opportunity to talk about something vaguely related that you have strong feelings about.

[ewillbefull]

This is Hacker News, not Hologram News; we don't have to deliberately avoid a discussion about these relevant issues because it will upset copyright maximalists.

[rex_mundi]

Because discussion of copyright woes related to emerging public technology is obviously a bad thing.