Skip to main content

View Diary: Labor and Copyright Law (71 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I was going to respond (0+ / 0-)

    but then i realize you are just mouthing off the same rhectoric of the anti copyright crowd. this diary is about the impact to those who aren't wealthy who make a middle class living such as graphic designers, web designers, game makers, and multiple others,  such as writers, down to basic mom and pop jewlry makers  etc.

    and yes, i know exactly how much indie film making cost since that's the career i'm transitioning to from practicing law.  and that's exactly why i can spot the bs you are putting out.  film cost alot of money to make regardless of the music rights. it's also quite possible to make a film without having to steal somene else's music to do it. there are a plenty of musicians looking to get their started  like i am. and like me, they probably want to make a living off of what they create without your idealogy getting in the way.

    •  No all creative income comes from copyright. (0+ / 0-)

      graphic designers, web designers, game makers, and multiple others,  such as writers, down to basic mom and pop jewlry makers  etc.

      Few graphic designers, web designers, and mom and pop jewelry makers use copyright law to get paid for their efforts to any great extent.

      Most graphic designers and web designers make their money doing commissioned works.  They have the same business model as a lot of pre-copyright law creative professionals such as Mozart and Leonardo DaVinci.

      Small jewelry makers draw a large part of their income from mark up on materials and labor, and a relatively small part from the designs themselves.  Also, as I noted before, no one wants to eliminate some compensation for pure copies.  Jewelry designs are trendy, and rarely stay in fashion more than 28 years.  Finally, jewelry design protection for derivative works is quite weak because a fairly minor difference is often not considered a derivative work and because many jewelry designs can fairly said to be derivative of the thousands of years of out of copyright designs.  Unlike software, there is a large public domain of jewelry designs.

      Even when there is a copyright infringement for jewelry, copyright law is rarely used to try to enforce that right because the dollars involved are small and the costs and risks of litigaiton are high.  Moreover, it is at least as common that a mom and pop jeweler (who may be serendipity make a similar design to a large company without actually copying, which is O.K. but can provoke good faith lawsuits) gets sued for copyright violation by a big operation than the other way around.

      The bigger issue for mom and pop jewelers is trademark which doesn't expire for good reason.  There is far more money in trying to pass of say a knock off design for one made by a big name designer, than trying to pass off a knock off under a no name designers label.  The aura of the person who made it has more value than the design itself, because it goes to expectations of the quality of the workmanship.

      As for game makers, I really am not worried if video games made in 1979 fall out of copyright now -- the economic cycle of those just isn't huge.  Most successful board games likely are fad driven and relatively short lived.  Most of the classic games would be out of copyright now, but for extension of copyright terms for already produced works made in 1976.  They aren't any worse off than they expected to be and have received a windfall.

      "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

      by ohwilleke on Fri Feb 16, 2007 at 09:36:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site