this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
858 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

59298 readers
5120 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (6 children)

That depends on if you see the current copyright system as far to start with. The current system is a far cry from how it was created and was co-opted by companies like Disney to maintain monopolies on their IP for MUCH longer than the system was supposed to protect.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 10 points 4 months ago (3 children)

This. If I'm not mistaken, the system was meant to operate like a hybrid between patents and trademarks. Iirc, things weren't originally under copyright by default and you had to regularly renew your copyright in order to keep it. Most of the media in the public domain is a result of companies failing to properly claim or renew copyright before the laws were changed. My understanding is that the reason for this was because the intent was to protect you from having your IP stolen while it was profitable to you, but then release said IP into the public domain once it was no longer profitable (aka wasn't worth renewing copyright on).

Then corpos spent a lot of money rewriting the system and now practically everything even remotely creative is under copyright that's effectively indefinite.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It wasn't just "the corpos", you can basically tie changes to the copyright system back to Disney trying to maintain a strangle hold on their fucking mouse.

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/mickey/

[–] polarbear@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

doesn't Disney count as 'the corpos'?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It counts as a corpo. Not multiple corpos.

Credit where credit is due.

load more comments (2 replies)