Should Intellectual Property exist?

[Plains-Cow]

I've corrected a number of false claims you've made about IP law, and pointed out the reality of the situation.

Every single time, rather than taking the occasion to listen to the corrections and ask further questions, you've instead doubled down or shifted the goalposts to some other line of thinking.

If you're suggesting I should take the time to give you a full class in fundamentals of intelectual property, then no. That's a 45 hours university class with significant entry requirements (like having to be in law school to begin with) that people get paid to give; I do not have time for that.

As to the main argument: I would prefer somewhat stronger protection for derivative not-for-profit works, but not unlimited freedom, no. In a quarter-century neck-deep in fanworks across multiple fandoms I've much more cases where attacks on fanwork by copyright holders were reasonable and justified than cases where they weren't. So these should largely remain possible.

Sorry not sorry. I've seen the heart of fanwork, and freeing it of any restrictions is a road paved with a lot of good intentions. We know where that goes for the original creators.

So I'm asking you to give me more specifics in good faith, and the comeback is "go debunk yourself?"

I ask about strawmen I'm setting up and you don't give quotes from me. I ask for clarification if we mean different things with terms/examples and you don't elaborate. I don't think I'm asking for 45 hours of your time, am I? Geez, if you think it's that worthless to talk to me, then why even respond to my posts at all?

I don't even know what you're "sorry not sorry" about when it seems like you support changes but don't elaborate on what specifically you'd like seen enshrined regarding fan content protections.

I don't believe that there is ever an attack on fanworks by copyright holders is ever justifiable. It's telling enough that your main argument isn't even that these websites should exist on the merit of fandoms alone but that they can be leveraged for marketing purposes for IP.

The original creators don't have the rights to restrict the fake actions and appearances of fictional people.

 

[Igaryd]

well aware that the gatekeeping exists. i'm speculating what kind of gatekeeping should be present in a healthy society (that would remain capitalist in the hypothetical).

i think "narrow" art should be subsidized in the middle example, for what it's worth. i don't know about their offensive or outlandish things, but it's often in the weird stuff that we can find some stuff that's really special. like, it's not like artists plan to be superrich, all while living on lavish government pay, go to paris and bang world class models. if that's what they prioritized, they would've gone into finance.

even doing popular art or art that people like is kind of a crapshoot. the music industry isn't full of misunderstood weird kooks. most of what is made and remains undiscovered is like the stuff on the radio. there's just not money people want to pay for art, but they indeed do want it around.

fwiw i'm one of the weird kooks that make weird art mostly. i actually have an award and such. people - a minority indeed, but very present - love what i do and i am out at readings a lot, teach and such. i'm much more succesful than the average artist. but getting paid for it, that's actually rare, even with my credentials.

i don't want to share personal details though, sorry, so it's not like i can prove it. just understand that even the weirdo art that's made is not particularly profitable even if popular.

Suffice it to say I believe there to be a hell of a big difference between the weird and the grotesque. I can remembersome cover art from back in the day from some scifi and fantasy novels that was both spectacularly weird and simultaneous weirdly beautiful. For my money it takes a truly special kind of talent to carry that off. I've also seen cover art that kept me from even thinking about buying the book. By the way I will not pry. Privacy get harder to come by every day and I will not be a party to depriving other of so rare a commodity.

As for my own art it is my own I've written a thousand thing including the beginnings of and epic fantasy poem I have about a half to three quarters of an album of original christian themed music stuck in my head and I've probably drawn a couple dozen haunted houses on my day. My ever lasting problem is that I do it for my own pleasure and I'm too much the dilettante to stick to anything for any real length of time/

 

[Igaryd]

Kinkade does not do farm pictures. He does stone cottages, stone bridges, streams, gazebos, flowers, places with lights on in every room, Christmas stuff (lots of churches), plenty of old-fashioned scenes.

I collected his calendars for awhile until they got too pricey. I've probably got a couple of dozen jigsaw puzzles of his stuff. I used to have a clock with one of his gazebo pictures on it, and it was one that had birdsong every hour (scared the hell out of company if they were here and birds suddenly started chirping from the clock). The clock doesn't work anymore, though.

AS I said rural which in my peculiar mind tranlates to farm scenes which to me does not translate to towering silos and giant barns per se.

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

from an artistic perspective? Why should it matter?

The creator of Pepe the Frog wasn't happy about Trumpkins co-opting the character.

 

[Igaryd]

Kinkade does not do farm pictures. He does stone cottages, stone bridges, streams, gazebos, flowers, places with lights on in every room, Christmas stuff (lots of churches), plenty of old-fashioned scenes.

I collected his calendars for awhile until they got too pricey. I've probably got a couple of dozen jigsaw puzzles of his stuff. I used to have a clock with one of his gazebo pictures on it, and it was one that had birdsong every hour (scared the hell out of company if they were here and birds suddenly started chirping from the clock). The clock doesn't work anymore, though.

Again what part of rural are you failing to grasp here: A stone cottage is the quintessential rural farm house of days gone by. I woke up a few summer mornings in one as a child spending time with my grandma and grandpa in eastern Kansas.

 

[Lexicus]

The creator of Pepe the Frog wasn't happy about Trumpkins co-opting the character.

Yeah but this is because right-wing ideology is evil and bad, not because doing your own take on someone else's art is necessarily bad. I never heard of the pepe creator being mad about pepe memes that weren't...you know...nazi

 

[Valka D'Ur]

So I'm asking you to give me more specifics in good faith, and the comeback is "go debunk yourself?"

I ask about strawmen I'm setting up and you don't give quotes from me. I ask for clarification if we mean different things with terms/examples and you don't elaborate. I don't think I'm asking for 45 hours of your time, am I? Geez, if you think it's that worthless to talk to me, then why even respond to my posts at all?

I don't even know what you're "sorry not sorry" about when it seems like you support changes but don't elaborate on what specifically you'd like seen enshrined regarding fan content protections.

I don't believe that there is ever an attack on fanworks by copyright holders is ever justifiable. It's telling enough that your main argument isn't even that these websites should exist on the merit of fandoms alone but that they can be leveraged for marketing purposes for IP.

The original creators don't have the rights to restrict the fake actions and appearances of fictional people.

There are a couple of websites that go into this and explain the legalities of fanfic. There are a few pertinent points to keep in mind.

Is the fan author/film maker attempting to make money or any kind of profit? If so, that's illegal and the creator/copyright holder has the legal right to stomp on that.

If not, then it's murky. Some authors are all in favor of throwing the legal book at fanfic writers. They can get downright vicious. I wonder what KJA/BH/HLP would do if someone mentioned to them that there are Dune fanfic stories out there that make it absolutely clear that their stories are based on FH's work - probably issue a C&D against the site, since they're that petty. That's what they did to the Dune community at Second Life and the Spanish fan film over a decade ago.

Others are "live and let live, as long as they don't try to profit, since they're keeping interest alive in the original work/my name".

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

Yeah but this is because right-wing ideology is evil and bad, not because doing your own take on someone else's art is necessarily bad. I never heard of the pepe creator being mad about pepe memes that weren't...you know...nazi

But some people in this thread want to tell him "too bad so sad, it wasn't yours to begin with, you're a thief for thinking you have any rights to it".

 

[Plains-Cow]

The creator of Pepe the Frog wasn't happy about Trumpkins co-opting the character.

We'd better ask Pepe how he feels about it. After all, we don't want him to be slandered as a Nazi, right?

I jest, because you can't control the behavior or appearances of fictional characters. He even tried to "kill off" Pepe, if I recall, because of it, and that still didn't stop people (and doesn't stop people) from using Pepe or characters that are now derived from his likeness.

There are a couple of websites that go into this and explain the legalities of fanfic. There are a few pertinent points to keep in mind.

Is the fan author/film maker attempting to make money or any kind of profit? If so, that's illegal and the creator/copyright holder has the legal right to stomp on that.

If not, then it's murky. Some authors are all in favor of throwing the legal book at fanfic writers. They can get downright vicious. I wonder what KJA/BH/HLP would do if someone mentioned to them that there are Dune fanfic stories out there that make it absolutely clear that their stories are based on FH's work - probably issue a C&D against the site, since they're that petty. That's what they did to the Dune community at Second Life and the Spanish fan film over a decade ago.

Others are "live and let live, as long as they don't try to profit, since they're keeping interest alive in the original work/my name".

I understand what you're saying and the legalities you're highlighting. What I don't like is that they exist at all. I appreciate that you are a person who understands just how viscous IP "owners" can be about how they treat real people writing about fictional characters.

 

[Plains-Cow]

But some people in this thread want to tell him "too bad so sad, it wasn't yours to begin with, you're a thief for thinking you have any rights to it".

Pepe's creator has freedom to draw Pepe however he wants him to be drawn. Like everyone else. He isn't the god of cartoon frogs who can rain them down unto the unwashed who "steal" his work.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

AS I said rural which in my peculiar mind tranlates to farm scenes which to me does not translate to towering silos and giant barns per se.

Again what part of rural are you failing to grasp here: A stone cottage is the quintessential rural farm house of days gone by. I woke up a few summer mornings in one as a child spending time with my grandma and grandpa in eastern Kansas.

First off: If you're going to get rude with me in successive posts, how about waiting until I've had my turn?

Secondly, I am familiar with rural life. I used to live on an acreage where we had two neighbors - the next acreage up the road, and then there was a farm.

Thirdly, I'm old enough to remember a time when going to a cottage/cabin for the summer meant no electricity, no indoor plumbing, and as the saying went, "If you want running water, you have to run and fetch it yourself." You really don't have to 'splain the concept of "rural" to me.

I said nothing about "towering silos" or "giant barns". I did try to link an image search to Thomas Kinkade paintings, but it turned my post to some weird thing resembling what my cat would have thrown up if she'd thrown up weblinks. So I had to edit all that out of my previous post.

As a Canadian born and raised and still living in Central Alberta, I have never been to eastern Kansas. All I really know about Kansas is that Dorothy lived there on a farm and got swept away by a tornado. And apparently everything in Kansas is in black and white.

I've also heard of a band called "Kansas." So that's the sum total of my knowledge of that state.

When I look at Kinkade's paintings, I'm reminded of the fairy tales and children's stories I read that were set in England. So it looks like Kansas doesn't have a monopoly on those.

I understand what you're saying and the legalities you're highlighting. What I don't like is that they exist at all. I appreciate that you are a person who understands just how viscous IP "owners" can be about how they treat real people writing about fictional characters.

Yes, it's really frustrating at times. In 1967 Gene Roddenberry gave his blessing to the very first known Star Trek fanzine, Spockanalia. A few years later, Star Trek convention dealers' rooms were being raided by Paramount suits, looking for fanzines, confiscating everything they could find. Nobody was getting rich off them, essentially charging just enough to cover the paper and ink and copying service. Nobody had their own computers, printers, or scanners back then.

I read this on TrekBBS, courtesy of Peter David, a tie-in author/comic writer. He doesn't seem to mind fanfiction, though I don't know if anyone does fanfic based on any of his non-Trek works.

It's been argued successfully that it's legal to write analyses of original work. If, for instance, I wanted to write a book analyzing time travel novels, for instance, that would be fine. As long as I gave all the proper accreditation to the original authors, I'd be good to go.

Alas, Sandra Meisel beat me to it, with her excellent essays on some of the very best time travel SF I've read (ie. the Time Patrol stories by Poul Anderson). Of course that doesn't mean I couldn't take my own crack at it some day. After all, it's been quite a while since her essays were published...

 

[Joij21]

No, it doesn't, because market access is not this perfectly flat and uniform line across the board for all products of a similar nature. Putting aside how easy it is to now get distributed by Amazon, it does nothing for putting you in the public eye or making purchasers aware of you.

Well the publisher based system where everything is physically in a library and you have to go rummage for it yourself or it's promoted by word of mouth/getting a best seller moniker/is put on display at the front of the library, etc. doesn't solve that problem either.

Slapping socialism on the publisher based method and having the party apparatus be the sole publisher does not solve the fundamental issue of equal promotion. Promotion is logistical not ideological. Finite library space, finite human attention spans to pay attention to every other person's promotion, etc.

 

[Joij21]

Because people are motivated to write what they think sells instead of what they want to write. I talked about this with Charlie Dickens already. How much will you compromise on your artistic vision to make something you think could be a lucrative media product? Countless art has had the life choked out of it by the capitalist media industry. Long before there were bad books on Amazon Books, there was Herge writing the same cartoon for 50 years because he couldn't stop, and lamenting the course of his life even as we all, happy greedy pigs, dined on Tintin and the Picaros.

Nah, see I disagree with this premise. You make it as though all the crappy decisions or simple ineptitude of others is the result of capitalism always interjecting in a negative way so as to make it so. The people aren't deficient, they're all at heart omnipotent/omniscient gods waiting to be unleashed from the chains of capitalism producing all their mortal flaws.

Just accept that most of the population isn't any good and using capitalism isn't a sufficient explanation to explain all of the ineptitude.

 

[Crezth]

The creator of Pepe the Frog wasn't happy about Trumpkins co-opting the character.

So what? That’s the Trumpkins’ right as far as I’m concerned.

 

[NinjaCow64]

Nah, see I disagree with this premise. You make it as though all the crappy decisions or simple ineptitude of others is the result of capitalism always interjecting in a negative way so as to make it so. The people aren't deficient, they're all at heart omnipotent/omniscient gods waiting to be unleashed from the chains of capitalism producing all their mortal flaws.

Just accept that most of the population isn't any good and using capitalism isn't a sufficient explanation to explain all of the ineptitude.

This is an incredibly misanthropic view of the world. Do you really think everyone who “can’t hack it” under capitalism, everyone whose art is unsuccessful, everyone who is poor is “deficient”? Do you really think that everyone was given equal opportunity to succeed in life?

 

[NinjaCow64]

She supports the fusion of business and government power?

She opposes civil liberties?

She wants the government to control the media?

She wants dissidents imprisoned?

Please link to some evidence.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Shoe0nHead

She recently recanted a lot of her views in favour of being a “Social Democrat” (lol) but like she still has almost all those videos up where she says a bunch of reactionary crap up and monetised. If she was serious she would take them all down.

 

[NinjaCow64]

One of the greatest pieces of western literature, Dante’s Inferno, is self-insert crossover fanfiction. Should he have been censored for publishing something that played with characters he did not originally create?

Indeed, so much of humanity’s great artistic legacy is artists riffing on what came before. IP just restricts their ability to do so for no good reason.

 

[Narz]

In a fully communist future we won't need it, we'll realize insane productivity gains from the free sharing of technical and operational information.

How you make money off your work in that society?

 

[GenMarshall]

How you make money off your work in that society?

You're asking someone who want's a money less society. Even I'm having trouble wraping around how it can be feasible on a large scale where you need a medium of exchange of value.

 

[Narz]

You're asking someone who want's a money less society. Even I'm having trouble wraping around how it can be feasible on a large scale where you need a medium of exchange of value.

Yeah that's what I'm trying to understand.

I watched some documentary about a utopian society without need for money (venus project I think).

I agree on the massive modern scale I don't see how even the best laid plans wouldn't become corrupted by authoritarians (not saying I think communism is a "best plan).

Your avatar has sick traps!