• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      324 months ago

      Nope, copyrights isn’t the issue, they enable people to earn money from their creativity, the issue is rather that they are way too long.

      Back in the 1780s copyright lasted 14 years after the work was created.

      This is fine, the current obscene legnth of copyright is terrible.

      • Random Dent
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 months ago

        I’d be fine with copyright being like 20 years or so, that’s plenty of time to make a good amount of money from your work IMO. But yeah the current system where some corporation gets to keep cashing in on something half a century after the author is dead is pretty ridiculous.

      • KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24
        link
        -13 months ago

        people have always been able to earn money from their creativity. copyright is just corporate greed.

    • metaStatic
      link
      fedilink
      154 months ago

      We only really run into trouble when we start treating corporations like people and copyright as a commodity in it’s own right.

      Non-transferable copyright for the life of the author would be perfectly acceptable.

      • KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24
        link
        43 months ago

        the statute of Anne was the first copyright law and it was written to stop printers in London from breaking each others’ knees over who was allowed to print the world of Shakespeare who was already long dead.

        copyright is a bill of goods when packaged as a protection for creatives.

      • JackGreenEarth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

        Not for something like medicine or crops that people will die if the copyright holder abuses their copyright. In that case we have to act for the greater good and make medicine first, compensate creators later, if at all.