That's one of those statements that seems obviously true, but I think it probably a lot more complicated in real life. Most people don't write things that they want covered by copyright (although it might be anyway).
For example, this message is would be copyrighted by me in most countries. I have absolutely no problem with you making a copy of it (or any other message I've written on HN). To be fair, I completely forget if there is a license clause in the HN agreement that I clicked on when I got my account, but if there isn't I hereby release every message I have ever written on HN under CC0. I don't feel in any way diminished by my action ;-)
Even with software, the vast majority of things I write, I assign copyright to the people who pay me. In fact, copyright is not important to the way I work. I don't write it and then hope someone will pay me after the fact. I have a contract which says that they will pay me for my effort of writing software. Heck, as the old Dilbert cartoon showed, I could twiddle my thumbs all day and I would still get paid (for a while).
Even for the programming I do outside of work, while I usually choose the GPL, if there was not copyright I wouldn't need to worry about licenses and I would still write the code. It would affect me slightly, but I wouldn't be marching down the street trying to reinstate copyright because people were "stealing" my code.
I have had old posts on usenet (yes, I'm that old) stuck on websites even with the wrong attribution (people taking "credit" for my crappy writing... suckers). There is no way I am worried enough to send a takedown request.
I don't think I'm unusual in this respect. In fact, I think the vast majority of people operate the same way. The people who do care are the people who create something in advance (usually without getting paid) and who hope to monetize it later. I have no problem imagining that most of them would cry foul when their work is copied. Every body else (i.e. most of the people in the world)? Not so much.
Most stuff people create ends up having little or no monetary value so copyright is never an issue for them whether they wanted to be covered by it or not. It's when something they create ends up having lots of value that they start caring about copyright.
I have a feeling, in time, detection of of even very small snippets of copyright infringements will be very easily detected by RIAA.
In time, RIAA will be one of the biggest entities on the planet?
In time, they will be sending every offending individual isp a demand letter. The fines will be low of course, at first, but will rise like traffic infractions have in the past twenty years? (I've heard this is alwready taking place?)
In time, we will still use the Internet, but it will end up being so filled with so many potential fines, it might not be worth going on? Notice in the mail from RIAA, "We see you visited www.ingringement of 1-1-2020. The blog had a copy written JPEG on the landing page. Since you looked at the picture, please send us $20.00 and we won't collate all infractions of isp 255:255:255.01 and take you to court."
I see the day, when you hear people saying, "Yea, It's just not worth the risk of a fine."
If I'm alive to see it. I could picture myself saying, "I never should have gotten rid of all my physical books, and I should have kept all those disks of music and entertainment?"
They are collectors items now--who would have thought?"
I would like to see every isp provider purge history immediatly, if technically and legally possible? I'm not sure if ISPs like Comcast, Version, and AT&T could provide access to the Internet without keeping track of individual isp addresses. I don't know why they need to keep a detailed history of every isp we clicked on? Something like TOR, but a commercial version, that every customer would be required to use according to TOS.
Right now they(Facebook, and Google) could be proactive, and start deleting just some of our data on the servers--instead of buying just more space? (and yes,
I know you own the information.) Start with deleting the information you keep on us that over 10 years ago? Please? We might remember the act of kindness when you are begging for customers in the future?
Yeah, the conversation degrades into wishful thinking pretty fast when you ask how we should distribute IP costs once we do away with the patent and copyright system.
Software patents may be broken, but we shouldn't throw away everything because of it.
There are people against copyright in principle though a very small number of people.
Mainly what I see is similar to using amendments to "poison" legislation. The abuse at the core of the current crazy USA rules (and then the USA forcing other countries to adopt USA rules) has poisoned the merits of copyright so much that many people find the current copyright reality abhorrent.
Now it also isn't the greatest comparison as the "poison" amendments are specifically created to exploit voting blocks to have to support the amendment that then creates legislation that can't gain enough votes to pass.
And the copyright law has been created by politicians giving companies that pay them lots of money legislation they want. There was no intent to create an unpalatable system so that people would revolt and demand change. So far it hasn't been so unpalatable as to cause the whole thing to collapse under the weight of poisonous amendments. And in fact with TPP we likely to see the USA again forcing new poisonous provisions onto our vassal states.
But what has happened is those poisonous provision have created a large number of people that are extremely unhappy with the current state of copyright. They just so far have been readily outmaneuvered over and over by the copyright cartel folks (as is happening with TPP, most likely, yet again).
It seems we might be getting close to a tipping point, but maybe not. But in any event I think the anti-copyright talk is much more anti-the-poisonous-copyright-extentions-that-have-nearly-no-economic-justification. I feel that way myself. While at the same time believing sensible copyright rules (the USA constitution seems about right in spirit) are wise. Something close to the years we originally had instead of all the extensions that have been added seems reasonable to me. I'm sure not to others. I feel very strongly the current rules are vastly too restrictive on moving work to the public domain and it is doing great damage to our economy as things stand now.
Agreed, not allowed to disclose anything further than this but close friend helped a client fight for some copyright issues...only to find out that said client had actually stolen works in the past. When karma bites you in the arse, it bites hard.
For example, this message is would be copyrighted by me in most countries. I have absolutely no problem with you making a copy of it (or any other message I've written on HN). To be fair, I completely forget if there is a license clause in the HN agreement that I clicked on when I got my account, but if there isn't I hereby release every message I have ever written on HN under CC0. I don't feel in any way diminished by my action ;-)
Even with software, the vast majority of things I write, I assign copyright to the people who pay me. In fact, copyright is not important to the way I work. I don't write it and then hope someone will pay me after the fact. I have a contract which says that they will pay me for my effort of writing software. Heck, as the old Dilbert cartoon showed, I could twiddle my thumbs all day and I would still get paid (for a while).
Even for the programming I do outside of work, while I usually choose the GPL, if there was not copyright I wouldn't need to worry about licenses and I would still write the code. It would affect me slightly, but I wouldn't be marching down the street trying to reinstate copyright because people were "stealing" my code.
I have had old posts on usenet (yes, I'm that old) stuck on websites even with the wrong attribution (people taking "credit" for my crappy writing... suckers). There is no way I am worried enough to send a takedown request.
I don't think I'm unusual in this respect. In fact, I think the vast majority of people operate the same way. The people who do care are the people who create something in advance (usually without getting paid) and who hope to monetize it later. I have no problem imagining that most of them would cry foul when their work is copied. Every body else (i.e. most of the people in the world)? Not so much.