Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: User-created conte nt providers, beware!

[Tom H. <to...@ve...>]

One of the biggest myths about GPL is that you can "use it as you  
wish", which simply isn't true. It's "free" as long as you feel like  
re-defining Free to be their definition of "free". You can use it  
without charge, but only if you're able and willing to make the  
results "Free" as well. Which of course you can't do in many situations.

To be clear - no copyright or ownership would mean that I could take  
all of the various GPL code on the net, integrate it into my products,  
call it my own, charge for it, and have it be totally closed source.  
Which currently, you're not allowed to do. I could do this because I  
would have just as much of a right to their source as they do.

Without copyright, someone using one of your sites could lift the  
images from the web site, use it, resell it, whatever without any fear  
and without paying the artist who created the work (not even the  
initial purchase).

Without ownership of the images / IP / whatever the items cease to be  
property. As such, theft is meaningless and no longer a crime. If  
someone steals your images / art off your computer they might be  
charged for the act of hacking your system, but they would be able to  
do whatever they wanted with the digital assets that they've stolen.  
If they then take those assets, and put them up on the internet for  
everyone to use, there would be _nothing_ anyone could do about it.  
The original artist would get ZERO compensation.

That is just a trite example ... imagine when big corporations are  
suddenly given unfettered access to anything and everything they can  
get their hands on. The amount of damage that some individuals with  
file sharing or whatever can do is miniscule when compared to the  
amount of damage that corporations could do. Imagine the recording  
industry being able to take the work of smaller artists, lifted  
directly from their web site, package it, market it, and sell it to  
the masses without ever paying the original artist anything. The more  
exploitative they are, the more profitable they will be. Of course  
this kind of activity is ultimately self destructive, but it can turn  
a quick profit with minimal investment so it would be done massively  
until everything has been sucked dry.

Without a system of checks and balances and a reasonable legal  
response to people who abuse others you end up with absolute chaos.  
When there's chaos, no one makes money. If no one makes money  
(companies or otherwise), then they can't feed themselves by  
performing that activity and they have to get a job elsewhere.  
Everyone either turns cannibal, gets out of the game entirely, or it's  
relegated to hobby only style work.

Innovation and creativity would all but stop and the digital age and  
all future progress would stall.

I'm not suggesting that things like GPL or even what you're doing with  
your sites are going to be the downfall of everything. They can only  
exist because they have the protections that copyright and other IP  
laws provide them, and as long as those laws exist the "Free" license  
folks can continue to co-exist with the closed source systems.

I'm also not suggesting that Copyright, Patents, etc aren't massively  
flawed ... they are ... but throwing them out entirely instead of  
working to fix the problems is asinine. They exist for a very good  
reason, they're just not keeping pace with the massive changes in the  
way things are created, used, and distributed.

Tom

On May 27, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Crosbie Fitch wrote:

> No need to apologise for being blunt. It's good to get to the point  
> rather than skirt the issues to avoid hurting people's feelings  
> (this is gamdevlists, not Facebook).
>
> I may be hopelessly unclear, but I am trying to implement mechanisms  
> that allow artists to be compensated for their labour.
>
> However, after the artist has been equitably compensated, their  
> labour can then be exploited by anyone else - royalty free.
>
> If you have difficulty with the idea that it could be possible for  
> someone, having been equitably compensated, to permit others to use  
> and build upon their work royalty free, you should check out the  
> world of Free Software, GPL, GNU/Linux, etc.
>
> Incidentally, someone has implemented the Digital Art Auction, i.e. http://www.propagateltd.com 
>   so this could well be the eBay for digital art. Life's too short  
> to worry about being a pioneer.
>
> You say the artist would be better served working on commission for  
> business companies. All I'm exploring is the same thing, but with  
> the company disintermediated. So, instead of accepting a commission  
> from one business company, you accept one from all or any of your  
> audience (which may well include several business companies that  
> might outbid other members of your audience). The difference is  
> though, that instead of the company asserting their copyright over  
> the work, it is neutralised such that anyone who receives it is free  
> to use it as they wish (a la GPL).
>
>
>
> From: Bob [mailto:ma...@mb...]
> Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2008 4:29pm
> To: gam...@li...
> Subject: Re: [GD-General] Pro-IP bill passed the house: User-created  
> conte nt providers, beware!
>
> Sorry to be blunt, but your storefront doesn't solve any problem.  
> Certainly, you may create the eBay of artwork, centralizing commerce  
> (you would not be much of a pioneer in that field now), but without  
> copyright protection one sale is enough to completely devalue the  
> work. The artist would be better served working on commission for  
> business companies, where they still only make one sale, but  
> themselves determine (often through bidding) the value of their work.
>
> The problem is not how to charge for a work of art. Nor even how to  
> keep people from copying a work that is on the internet for private  
> use. It is, rather, how to avoid having your labour (and I do mean  
> labour, as any 3d artist can tell you that a decent model represents  
> often hundreds of hours of eye-straining, wrist-damaging work),  
> exploited for the profit of others without compensation.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/_______________________________________________
> Gamedevlists-general mailing list
> Gam...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general
> Archives:
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=557