Found it first here - https://mastodon.social/@BonehouseWasps/111692479718694120
Not sure if this is the right community to discuss here in Lemmy?
Found it first here - https://mastodon.social/@BonehouseWasps/111692479718694120
Not sure if this is the right community to discuss here in Lemmy?
You mean the ones who routinely come out saying how X corporation stole their work and they received nothing for it?
The ones where if you try to challenge the corporations hoarding human cultural works you’ll find yourself in a legal battle you can’t afford to enter.
The amount of times an artist “wins” in the system vs a corporation is laughable. It’s designed to protect you and I, like the rest of the legal system does (it doesn’t).
Yes.The ones who routinely use copyright to get some form of payment. I know several people who had their photographs reublished by the Daily Mail and subsequently got payment. It happens. It’s an imperfect system, but still one that allows small artists to make a living.
I mean, it really isn’t. It’s the entire backbone of an industry whereby, for example a photographer or illustrator can supply woirk to a magazine on a single use license. It’s how people who supply photo libraries make a living. It’s how small bands have at least some protection.
deleted by creator
The difference is, even if it worked properly I would still not be in favour of denying people freedom to use cultural works.
deleted by creator
Are you a professional at making shit up?
I’m an anarchist, I don’t believe in companies existing at all.
deleted by creator
Because the focus is on people, I don’t care if it benefits a company secondarily.
deleted by creator
And you have the system that judges peoples worth by the number in their bank accounts and the amount of things they own to thank for that.
deleted by creator
Oh did they break into their house and take their only version?
Copying is not theft.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator