Copyfraud: making the case for actual copyright enforcement

Discuss

8 Responses to “Copyfraud: making the case for actual copyright enforcement”

  1. lafave says:

    Name one federal regulatory agency that hasn’t been corrupted by a revolving employment door between the agency and the regulated businesses.

    And I also have no faith in the “Justice” Dept.

    But it’s a nice idea in theory.

  2. benenglish says:

    The summary makes reference to “…the fraudulent claims made by Mattel against artists who make fun of Barbie.”

    At one time, my sister was one of the biggest dealers of vintage Barbie in the U.S.A.  Thus, I have some first-hand knowledge of this topic.  Mattel has hurt some good people who did harmless things, has been uneven in their actions (you should see some of the stuff people got away with back in the 1960s that Mattel would go bonkers about if it happened today), and has managed to directly threaten my sister (to her economic detriment) twice.  It’s nice to hear that someone may have done a decent job of documenting Mattels bad actions and putting them into a larger context.  I’ll buy the book just to read those parts then pass it along to sis. 

  3. Note that fair use and other lienient “concessions” of copyright aren’t “rights”, they’re allowances. Tolerated non persecuted uses. This apparent paradox is because copyright is the defined “right” in this case, the “right” is to restrict, and fair use is the exemption of this right. Therefore, there is no such thing as a “right to fair use”, only a “right to restrict copies with exceptions”.

    The main problem is that we indeed have not gotten the law right, and do not have the exceptions of the restriction of copying known as “copyright” be a right onto themselves.

    Copyright, as the right to restrict copies, is also not concerned with peting out punishment for falsely claiming it. It leaves the regulation of this aspect up to the civil courts in case anybody complains. The decisions of this court will not “change” copyright, because the complaint being resolved isn’t about copyright, but about improper use of the law, therefore copyright remains “untarnished” by any decision of its improper application.

    Furthermore, since fair use is not a right, it cannot be enforced. This means that people who exercise copyright (the restricting of copying) are not required to respect fair use when they choose how to distribute their content. Which is why DRM is not illegal, because it does not violate any existing right.

    We’ve gotten the law so badly ass backwards it’s not even funny anymore. In my opinion copyright is so borked, and unfixable and damned to eternal development hell, that it’s not worth the bother. Either we give it up voluntarily, or it’ll auto-self-destruct in due course. Either way, copyright is a dead-end back alley of law destined to go nowhere useful anymore.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Enforcing the rules is apparently vastly more palatable to the human psyche than thinking about the rules.

  4. wryfi says:

    “Reading Mazzone gives you the idea that the technical question of solving copyright is actually rather simple — though finding the political will may prove much harder.”

    This is true of almost every broken system that we come up against today. The problem is almost never an insurmountable technical obstacle. Rather, it is nearly always a problem of political will, entrenched social dynamics, and greed.

    The issue isn’t how to fix copyright (though I’m sure Mazzone has some clever ideas), or patents, or healthcare, or banking, or even how to prevent starvation. There are all kinds of innovative ideas for fixing these problems. The issue is that nobody in power wants to change, because those in power directly benefit from the (increasingly blatant) corruption.

    The only issue that matters is how to replace corrupt systems with healthy ones.

  5. miasm says:

    This just in: fuck you buddy, with your no lobbyists or lawyers.

  6. The public and common good are sinking fast. It’s all about money, money, money. YouTube has automated false rights claims of audio material. I have had several videos using the same audio (Sousa’s “Stars & Stripes Forever” by the U.S. Army Band), claimed by an outfit called “rumblefish”. They always relinquish claims after I dispute this, but YOuTube continues to allow them to make these same false claims. But of course, youtube and rumblefish are colluding to make money from this scam. Helloooo0O Class Action lawsuit?

  7. aaeru says:

    I would actually argue that human nature means it is impossible for it to be balanced. Even if you bring the copyright-handcuffs down to unmalignant levels, the next generation will forget what their previous generation  had fought for through tears & blood,  and then, sooner than u realize, the corporations will hijack policy-making (again) and cause copyright to become the tyranny it has now become.

    The only solution is to just kill it.

    History shows that human beings don’t deserve to have this kind of power. Everytime they get it, the media lobbies put their grubby hands on congress and then just fuck it up. You can’t balance it because the Human Condition is just THIS shit.

    Human beings don’t deserve to be beneficiaries of this set of economic laws known as copyright.

Leave a Reply