The Big Picture: Copywrong
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Term&MMCurve.gif)
I do not believe in IP as property in the traditional sense rather I believe you can limit its profit rights to the IP owner and whoever they license it too. Without a revenue stream something cannot be distributed to the point it gains enough market share to do damage thus you limit IP to true non profiting ventures and those with the license to sell it.
As far as copy right goes I believe if it has not gaining revenue it can do no harm. Copyright needs to be based more on revenue stream/profit and less on distribution. As far as fair use goes it needs hard limits based on time/quality factors as so lawyers cannot sue you at the drop of a hat. We also need a IP system that can easily track harmless noncommercial derived works like re mixs and music video tributes. This way a for profit site like youtube just selects the IP owner and the IP owner gets a cut of revenue and no one gets banned or a video gets blocked. Basically a system that seeks to okay harmless and or nonprofit redistribution first before trying to ban it because it shows too much, ect.
As far as copy right goes I believe if it has not revenue stream that it can do no harm. Copyright needs needs to be based more on revenue stream/profit and less on distribution. As far as fair use goes it needs hard limits based on
As far as copy right goes I believe if it has not gaining revenue it can do no harm. Copyright needs to be based more on revenue stream/profit and less on distribution. As far as fair use goes it needs hard limits based on time/quality factors as so lawyers cannot sue you at the drop of a hat. We also need a IP system that can easily track harmless noncommercial derived works like re mixs and music video tributes. This way a for profit site like youtube just selects the IP owner and the IP owner gets a cut of revenue and no one gets banned or a video gets blocked. Basically a system that seeks to okay harmless and or nonprofit redistribution first before trying to ban it because it shows too much, ect.
As far as copy right goes I believe if it has not revenue stream that it can do no harm. Copyright needs needs to be based more on revenue stream/profit and less on distribution. As far as fair use goes it needs hard limits based on
I can understand Hollywood getting pissed that movies are being illegally posted online but part of that is their own fault for multiple reasons. One of them is that most movies or TV shows have yet to made public via DVD/Blu-Ray or digital download. For example, there are tons of import shows from Japan where a lot of people want to see (I.E. the Kamen Rider and Sentai series) but its not happening due to companies sitting on them and not considering the idea that there is a market for this stuff outside of their own country. Same with Hollywood, especially older movies that haven't seen a new release since it was put out on VHS. There is a lot of profit to be made, maybe not big profit, but you have to think long term rather than focus on the quick buck.
In regards to the "Let's Play" copyright issue, YouTube/Google, the movie, and the games industry need to get their heads out of their asses and figure this shit out properly. Because if they continue with shutting down channels and hurting the people, THEY WILL FUCKING LOSE! What makes me sure about that? Talk to the music industry about their legal battle against Napster. When someone made a program where people can share songs and movies for free, the corporations tried taking them to court for cutting them out of their profit. But, ironically, they began losing money due to the countless lawsuits they had to file. Also, Steve Jobs came along with iTunes and not only revolutionized the industry but made the companies carrying out these lawsuits look even more retarded.
I admit, its a different situation than what YouTube/Google have on their hands but its boils down to one thing-companies trying to resist change. Companies need to learn how to adapt to the ever evolving presence of technology and they need to hammer out new copyright rules that will benefit all parties and not just themselves. To me, what these channels are doing is offer free advertisement for new and older games. I'm willing to bet that if someone watches a tutorial on a new fighting game or a "Let's play" on a classic game, they will want to purchase and play this game. They need to take advantage of this and not strike down people who could be working alongside you. If they continue to step on the backs of the people, then they better not act surprised when the people strike back.
In regards to the "Let's Play" copyright issue, YouTube/Google, the movie, and the games industry need to get their heads out of their asses and figure this shit out properly. Because if they continue with shutting down channels and hurting the people, THEY WILL FUCKING LOSE! What makes me sure about that? Talk to the music industry about their legal battle against Napster. When someone made a program where people can share songs and movies for free, the corporations tried taking them to court for cutting them out of their profit. But, ironically, they began losing money due to the countless lawsuits they had to file. Also, Steve Jobs came along with iTunes and not only revolutionized the industry but made the companies carrying out these lawsuits look even more retarded.
I admit, its a different situation than what YouTube/Google have on their hands but its boils down to one thing-companies trying to resist change. Companies need to learn how to adapt to the ever evolving presence of technology and they need to hammer out new copyright rules that will benefit all parties and not just themselves. To me, what these channels are doing is offer free advertisement for new and older games. I'm willing to bet that if someone watches a tutorial on a new fighting game or a "Let's play" on a classic game, they will want to purchase and play this game. They need to take advantage of this and not strike down people who could be working alongside you. If they continue to step on the backs of the people, then they better not act surprised when the people strike back.
True, but he opens up with it, so he implies that that the Content ID thing is designed to allow the removal of criticism.Zachary Amaranth said:
It could be because I have a bad habit of writing my response as I watch the video.
Not really as you will never attain true Communism as the people at the top will acquire more and more while placing more burdens upon the public. Capitalism works in the sense that you give ALL people the chance to acquire more the trouble is if you set apart those at the top as untouchable nobility it will collapse just the same.Full Metal Bolshevik said:
Stop quoting me, you make me feel stupid... But in all seriousness, thank you for the corrections. This is largely the fault of Google/Youtube, if not entirely, and they really need to sort themselves out. Or at least hire some people to do the bots' jobs. Come on Google, you could probably singlehandedly solve the unemployment problem!Zachary Amaranth said:
I can agree with that the only trouble is you are going to have to get rid of governmental corruption and greed for it to happen.Its going to take awhile for humanity to get away from greed and self interest when that happens you will get a stable long lasting communistic system.Full Metal Bolshevik said:
1st off, that's the point. It's up to the owners of copyrights/patents to point out when someone is abusing their copyrights; then the government steps in to enforce the law. This isn't the government "playing hitman"; it's the government protecting the rights of creators in accordance with the law.Falseprophet said:
2nd, both of those articles show pretty clearly that the government and companies were in the right (at least in this particular case). Not frightening to me at all.
Easy does it there, friend. While you're certainly correct, humanity still hasn't come to grips with ethical ideas from the Enlightenment, and that was a century before Marxism (and I wonder if I'm being too generous and the same could be said of most ethical ideas introduced by artists and philosophers of the ancient world also). Our collective failing to wrangle even basic ideas like freedom of speech, freedom of privacy, and so on is more than enough to attest to the idea that our glorious capitalism has more than a little feudalist/Pharaoh-like baggage. I certainly want to have faith in the idea that Marx's dialectical model of history could transpire over the whole of time, but the idea that the 'capitalism' that we all know adhered (and continues to adhere) to some 'invisible hand of the market' or whatever has been complete bullshit at all historical points.Full Metal Bolshevik said:
Am I crazy, or has Bob been exceptionally insightful these past couple of weeks?
OT: The "internet is the new world" metaphor makes sense, but that only covers the psychology. Just because two conflicts are started for the same reasons doesn't mean they will end the same way.
OT: The "internet is the new world" metaphor makes sense, but that only covers the psychology. Just because two conflicts are started for the same reasons doesn't mean they will end the same way.
Sadly though the point is clearly missed. This isn't ONLY about the big publishers, and for the most part some of the publishers didn't even want this. What's happened is publishers on kept the rights the music, mo cap, voice acting for so long that it went back to the People that made it and now THEY are seeing their work being used in not fair-use and in stuff people are making money off it.
Music is the big thing right now, It might not be the publisher claiming the music, it might be the person that made it that made a hundred or so bucks making it. You have Guy Cihi, who was only paid once for his voice acting and mocap and still owns it who could take down every silent hill 2 gameplay footage if he wanted.
Music is the big thing right now, It might not be the publisher claiming the music, it might be the person that made it that made a hundred or so bucks making it. You have Guy Cihi, who was only paid once for his voice acting and mocap and still owns it who could take down every silent hill 2 gameplay footage if he wanted.
Another problem with this fiasco is this:
People are abusing it like crazy. In another topic I mentioned that some russian whore claimed she owns the word Persona and abused the YT copyright system and had every video relating to the word persona got removed. Even Atlus themselves got hit by it. Same with Littlekuriboh and every hater thinking they can pretend to be 4kids and SEGA with anything that involves the Shining Force game series.
That's the first thing we need to get rid of.
People are abusing it like crazy. In another topic I mentioned that some russian whore claimed she owns the word Persona and abused the YT copyright system and had every video relating to the word persona got removed. Even Atlus themselves got hit by it. Same with Littlekuriboh and every hater thinking they can pretend to be 4kids and SEGA with anything that involves the Shining Force game series.
That's the first thing we need to get rid of.