Copyright question - Not for hire

[antonija 0]

Quote

I think it's time to redistrubute the wealth of those music copyrights there Douglas. It's not fair that you have musical talant that some people are willing to pay for, and some of us don't. We all should be making money off of YOUR music........ (it's amazing that some people actually think this way)

Yes, it is... who are you referring to?

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[tonyhathaway 0]

No one specific. I believe YOU are talking about laws lasting so long, I get that. I am just saying that there are LOT of people out there who think paying for photos is just crazy. I have dealt with MANY of them over the years. People that think whatever I shoot, they should be able to use as well no questions asked.......

My O.C.D. has me chasing a dream my A.D.D. won't let me catch.

[DSE 3]

I honestly don't know how I feel about length of copyright protections.

In my den is a stitching horse that my great great grandfather built. It's mine, passed down through the generations.

Copyright law seems to protect the heirs of those that build creative works, much like my physical possession allows me to continue to pass on the stitching horse to my children.

[tonyhathaway 0]

Imaging if Ray Crock's kid had to give up McDonalds after the founder, Ray died? Now apply that to copyright. I see nothing wrong with it. If you create something, it should be yours. A photo, a song, a restaurant, etc.

My O.C.D. has me chasing a dream my A.D.D. won't let me catch.

[antonija 0]

The thing is you never have to give your stuff away, ever. Even when copyright is over the actual work is still yours.

All it does is it gives others the right to try and replicate it. While this is trivial for digital content, I very much doubt someone is going to replicate DSE's horse his great great grandfather made. And even if some one does replicate it, DSE will still be in possession of original work and can do with it whatever he likes.

It's the right to copy, not the right to own.

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[FreeflyChile 0]

Quote

The thing is you never have to give your stuff away, ever. Even when copyright is over the actual work is still yours.

All it does is it gives others the right to try and replicate it. While this is trivial for digital content, I very much doubt someone is going to replicate DSE's horse his great great grandfather made. And even if some one does replicate it, DSE will still be in possession of original work and can do with it whatever he likes.

It's the right to copy, not the right to own.

The problem with this is that there's a big difference between owning the physical copy of something and the right to make it yourself. There's a tremendous difference in value.

In your example, using it to the digital realm - if DSE produces a book and has an original copy in his hard drive or even printed out on his desk - the value in his work is in the ability to distribute it to others, and gain the rewards of his work. Sure, his copy of it may be worth the amount of paper it's printed on + whatever it is worth to have the original copy, but that PALES in comparison to the value of being able to exclusively sell the book.

He can do whatever he likes with his copy of the book, sell it for 30 bucks, burn it, whatever. So can you with any CD you legally purchased.

(caveat - no clue how much a book DSE publishes goes for.