Jimquisition: Piracy Episode One - Copyright

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Copyright law is seriously screwed up. As are the ways in which many content creators are forced to negotiate if they want their product to get advertised and distributed through mainstream channels.

Consider for a moment this business with Sony and Spider-Man. Sony is making a new Spider-Man movie because if they don't, they lose their right to the license back to Marvel.

That's the way it should work, but that's not the standard. That happened because a company like Marvel has the money and clout to negotiate something like that with another big company like Sony.

As it stands, copyright on an IP can last for over a hundred years. Long after the death of its creators, a corporation can still make a buck on Mickey Mouse or Superman... And stomp on a day-care center for painting one of those characters on their wall without authorization.

In at least one sense, Jim is spot-on. SOPA and PIPA are to a great extent more about controlling the means of distribution than actual copyright infringement. About old-media companies sinking their claws into new-media ones to prevent themselves from sliding into irrelevance, any wounds they inflict on the upstarts in the process being a bonus.

To be clear: Minecraft is the exception, not the rule. There are plenty of developers selling their games on Steam who languish in obscurity, and it's not because their work isn't any good; it's still very difficult for a small, independent development team to draw the attention to be successful. Which leads many back to the big publishers and those Faustian bargains to raise development and advertising capital at the cost of losing their hard work.

Sober Thal said:
newdarkcloud said:
Sober Thal said:
Jimothy Sterling said:
Sober Thal said:
Fun fact. The artists and developers own 100% of their IP. They then decide to sell the rights away for money and more resources. Duh.
That's what happens when the rights-buyers have rigged the game in their favor before the artists create their art. Duh.
Creators have a choice to sign these contracts. Are we implying that these people who make games don't know how to read?
Publishers won't even look at a developer if the developer wants to keep the majority share of the rights to the IP. The only exception is when the developer has already become well known enough to have publishers compete for them.
What's wrong with that? Are publishers just supposed to gamble away money on possible crap product?
Are you even aware of the ludicrous double standard in what you've said?

Consumers are supposed to be capable of doing research to find out if the game is any good. Developers are supposed to be able to go through enormous contracts with a fine toothed comb while wolves growl at their door and the members of their team live on ramen noodles- not that they necessarily have agents or legal teams to go through the ramifications of those contracts, they're just supposed to be inherently able to do so under pressure, and if not, well, sucks to be them.

But the big publishers! Oh, dear stars, won't someone think of the poor Sonys and Activisions and EAs?! How are they supposed to live without contracts that screw over their serfs? Why should companies with millions in the bank be expected to suffer any kind of risk? It's not like they can do any sort of research! It's not like they get some kind of- I don't know, design document or prospectus advising them as to what the developer hopes to do with their money, so they might scrutinize it and consider whether it's a good investment or not. It's not like they have marketing departments to advise them on just this matter. It's not like they can set milestones demanding certain results by a certain time frame, or even withhold payment altogether if the development team doesn't suddenly move in an entirely different direction.

No, no! The publishers are the victims, here! And a contract that has a creator lose all rights to the work they've created, that may see that work turned over to create derivative works that they don't see a cent from- why, how could a dev recognize that with anything other than humble gratitude?
 

Korten12

Now I want ma...!
Aug 26, 2009
10,766
0
0
One thing I wondered is that, when Copyright ends, how do you stop people from alterting stuff (this is just based on my knowledge, so it maybe wrong.) Let's say when Lotro goes copyright free, then couldn't anyone say: "I am going to make an offical sequel!" or I am going to change how the stories went.

Then in such as a universe as Middle Earth, how do you tell what is canon and what's not afterwards..?

I don't want to make a universe, and then after copyright ends, someone continues the works and butchereds the characters.
 

MiracleOfSound

Fight like a Krogan
Jan 3, 2009
17,776
0
0
This was an interesting episode for me personally.

I feel like a lot of pirates don't morally differentiate between 'victimless' stealing from Publishing giants and taking stuff from small, struggling artists.

Case in point, I felt pretty sad the first time I found these:

http://www.google.ie/search?ix=hcb&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=miracle+of+sound#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=miracle+of+sound+torrent&pbx=1&oq=miracle+of+sound+torrent&aq=f&aqi=g1g-m1g-b1&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1858l4958l0l5329l8l7l0l0l0l0l226l1033l1.5.1l7l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&fp=6985811cc01f9710&ix=hcb&biw=1280&bih=699
 

Monsterfurby

New member
Mar 7, 2008
871
0
0
See, that's why I love living in Germany. Under German copyright law, it is technically impossible to "give away" the copyright to anything. You, as creator, ALWAYS own it. You can of course contractually lend it to a company and give exclusive rights, but it always defaults back to the creator if the company does not use it. Why doesn't copyright law in common law countries work like that? Because common law has been obsolete since before its creation, that's why.
 

Bostur

New member
Mar 14, 2011
1,070
0
0
Korten12 said:
One thing I wondered is that, when Copyright ends, how do you stop people from alterting stuff (this is just based on my knowledge, so it maybe wrong.) Let's say when Lotro goes copyright free, then couldn't anyone say: "I am going to make an offical sequel!" or I am going to change how the stories went.

Then in such as a universe as Middle Earth, how do you tell what is canon and what's not afterwards..?

I don't want to make a universe, and then after copyright ends, someone continues the works and butchereds the characters.
The simple answer is, you don't. Disney is well know for having 'butchered' a lot of original IP. And some of the authors that Disney borrowed from themselves had a liberal view of their sources. Another way to see it is to call it artistic interpretation.

If Lord of The Rings is considered to be the best by our ancestors, they may treat the original as 'canon'. If they consider a derived work better that would probably become the popular interpretation.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,651
0
0
Jim is 100% right about publishers being the middle man. And we need to cut the middle man out of the equation. It's a purely capitalist concept that's no longer necessary because of other ways of distributing material, thanks to technology development. Most publishers really are just a bunch of people who don't do anything and they get payed a lot for it. Why should they exist? The world would be a better place is all developers published their own stuff.
 

Korten12

Now I want ma...!
Aug 26, 2009
10,766
0
0
Bostur said:
Korten12 said:
One thing I wondered is that, when Copyright ends, how do you stop people from alterting stuff (this is just based on my knowledge, so it maybe wrong.) Let's say when Lotro goes copyright free, then couldn't anyone say: "I am going to make an offical sequel!" or I am going to change how the stories went.

Then in such as a universe as Middle Earth, how do you tell what is canon and what's not afterwards..?

I don't want to make a universe, and then after copyright ends, someone continues the works and butchereds the characters.
The simple answer is, you don't. Disney is well know for having 'butchered' a lot of original IP. And some of the authors that Disney borrowed from themselves had a liberal view of their sources. Another way to see it is to call it artistic interpretation.

If Lord of The Rings is considered to be the best by our ancestors, they may treat the original as 'canon'. If they consider a derived work better that would probably become the popular interpretation.
But shouldn't there be the option to only allow some people to edit or expand on the works or none at all. For like, ever?
 

punipunipyo

New member
Jan 20, 2011
486
0
0
I couldn't agreed more, this is EXACTLY what this is ALL ABOUT! Remember (i think 2 years ago) they try to pass a "orphan art" law? where companies can go around the net, and "Adopt" an art that was not "Copyrighted" (like going through all the paper works, money prepossessing to get), such like a piece of "art student's work", they can just pick up, and use!? with out being punished for?, and now they are saying that we can't even use their game clips to do rents/reviews? WTF!?
 

masticina

New member
Jan 19, 2011
763
0
0
They are killing their own market...

I life in europe, for many many years it would take 6 months easily for a movie that came out in America to come out here. Why? WHY!

There are quite some movies we would love to own on well DVD and Blu-ray and yes even on some kind of streaming service. Again if the big guns upstairs don't want it .. all you can do is go grey!

That and their fight against a changing world. A world in what the internet is good enough to provide our entertainment. But guess what..they still shrug it off. Sure there is netflix in america but not in europe!

Yes and I do dislike how they are acting like spoiled brats. Yes they have the money to buy the goverment and the laws... even against the wishes of the normal people.
 

fubaring0

New member
Apr 30, 2011
11
0
0
I find this subject interesting because the oldest entertainment industry has the most friendly attitude towards the creators of their products. The Publishing Industry where the writers own their copyright and the publishers job is to print and distribute the content.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
Marmooset said:
You weren't wrong the first time. They are. What happens in another area does not change the nature of an individual's actions.
Your example, if taken to extremes, would give a partial justification for Swinging Ape to engage in piracy - not the sideline sitting parasites who actually do so. Another bad guy in the room does not preclude you from being one, too.
Pretty much this. Someone being a dick doesn't give you right to be a dick right back. It may be therapeutic, but it's far from justified.

That said, Jim is pretty much spot-on insofar as copyright law does need to change. Unfortunately, the changes it needs are directly opposed to the entertainment industry making piles of cash, and as such is not likely to pass.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Scrustle said:
Interesting to see how what Jim says has changed since this whole SOPA thing. I'm not calling him a hypocrite or anything, because he's not. It's just interesting to see how his ideas are changing in light of changing events.
It is and I hope more people are starting to look at the other side of the argument. After SOPA/PIPA, I would have to question the sanity of anyone who still fights FOR the bottom line of multi-millionaire corporations. The same corporations who flat out told everyone that they don't care about consumer rights or internet freedom. Don't fight for them people, they won't fight for you and in fact were fighting against you.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Sober Thal said:
Diana Kingston-Gabai said:
Sober Thal said:
What's wrong with that? Are publishers just supposed to gamble away money on possible crap product?
Why not? We (the customers) do...
How so? You mean the people that don't know how to research a product before they buy it?

Yeah, they gamble, and it's silly.

By research, does that include downloading a full game trial, to determine if your PC can run it, because the publishers didn't want to fund a demo and wanted you to buy blind?
 

violinist1129

New member
Oct 12, 2011
101
0
0
lozfoe444 said:
I never understood why every single god damn pro-piracy video uses that "two people sharing a file with hearts" image when publishers make it pretty clear that it should be one person copying a paper while the other person (who is blind in this case) waves a knife around trying to hit them.

Publishers don't want to share their stuff. What makes you think that it's OK?