Copyright: How It Went Wrong

What people said

Chardok · 2017-12 · Strong recommendation

CGP Grey also did a fantastic video on the history of copyright and Disney's constant involvement. [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗

aestra · 2013-12 · Recommendation

It isn't just about "stealing." Allowing works to enter the public domain actually encourages more works to be created. People are free to remake and remix works in the public domain. Think: A REAL lot of old Disney movies (Alice and Wonderland, Jungle Book, Pinocchio...) Pride and Prejudice with Zombies That Romeo and Juliet movie with Leonardo DiCaprio and guns. A Christmas Carol in play form (it lends itself really well to live theater, I suggest seeing it!) West Side Story (inspired by Romeo and Juliet) Clueless (based on Jane Austen's 1815 novel Emma) The anime/manga Lupin III was inspired by the French gentleman thief Arsène Lupin, created by Maurice Leblanc. Japan didn't enforce copyright at the time of its creation but the Leblanc estate got mad once Lupin started being sold in North America. Some foreign releases changed his name as a result. In 2012, Leblanc's original Arsène Lupin entered the public domain in France See this video for a different perspective: [VIDEO] Also read the copyright clause in the Constitution! [LINK] Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause, empowers the United States Congress: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" is the goal and purpose of copyright, as written by the founding fathers, not "financial

Read the original HN comment ↗

ucha · 2013-07 · Recommendation

Copyrights are a deal passed between society and authors to encourage creative production. If they create something new, they can live off it for sometime until their copyright expires. Extending copyrights years after the author's death may serve a corporation or their children that can live on that rent but fails at establishing an incentive for creation. This video by CGP Grey summaries the problem pretty well ( [VIDEO] )

Read the original HN comment ↗