I am not against copyright!
Inspired by more and more articles about copyright appearing on Habré ...
Some news causes a smile, some - indignation, but more often it just becomes sad.
Sadly, the extent to which the “author <-> content consumer” relationship is imperfect; how many holes in the legislation with regards to this sphere, how many freeloaders.
Sadly from public opinion, from the opinions of the authors themselves and the views of the government.
But I am not against copyright!
Yes, yes, youheard right. I am not against copyright in general, I am against such copyright, which we can observe in the face of RAO, RIAA and others. In the face of large labels and those who are lobbying at the legislative level.
')
I remember reading somewhere a fantastic story about the near future, where even using someone else's book (not to mention computers) was severely punished as copyright infringement. When I read, I thought - hyperbole, it never will be. But over time, such a future seems increasingly real. It is almost here.
Why almost? Everything is very simple - the legislative base is already there. Already you can be fined for watching, say, football / movies on TV with friends / family - public reproduction.
Having downloaded (or bought) a book, when you transfer it to someone, you are already a pirate.
Taking certain information from open sources is also a pirate, if not paid for the content.
Piracy as such is a serious offense with a solid deadline.
I, in principle, not against it. I am against the fact that using even free (not necessarily OpenSource) works (up to music / films), during the check you must prove that you are not a camel, and you have the right to use this information. By the way, not the fact that you prove it.
And I am against the fact that gradually, at the legislative level, there are attempts at all to declare any free information out of law. Take the same free software - at least one program in any sphere has a state one. license (billing there any, monitoring)? No, it does not, at least I have not seen this. And it will not, because it does not bring a guaranteed income in the form of a purchase, and it cannot be made to pay for its use.
In addition, I am against the fact that the authors do not receive most of the profits from the sale of their works. But labels, all sorts of radioactive waste and other offices, which should be cherished and cherished by the authors, put the money in their pockets.
And on quite legal grounds.
I am not against copyright. I buy licensed discs with movies that I liked. The same applies to music. I go to the cinema. Most of the time, I don’t ignore the Donate button on the author’s website if I use his product.
But I am against middlemen. Against that trough and the system that covers this feeder.
I just do not want the authors to stop creating. And I do not want to use frankly low-quality product just because someone earns it.
I am not against copyright. I am for free information and fair reward authors.
Yes, I am against the system.
Some news causes a smile, some - indignation, but more often it just becomes sad.
Sadly, the extent to which the “author <-> content consumer” relationship is imperfect; how many holes in the legislation with regards to this sphere, how many freeloaders.
Sadly from public opinion, from the opinions of the authors themselves and the views of the government.
But I am not against copyright!
Yes, yes, you
')
I remember reading somewhere a fantastic story about the near future, where even using someone else's book (not to mention computers) was severely punished as copyright infringement. When I read, I thought - hyperbole, it never will be. But over time, such a future seems increasingly real. It is almost here.
Why almost? Everything is very simple - the legislative base is already there. Already you can be fined for watching, say, football / movies on TV with friends / family - public reproduction.
Having downloaded (or bought) a book, when you transfer it to someone, you are already a pirate.
Taking certain information from open sources is also a pirate, if not paid for the content.
Piracy as such is a serious offense with a solid deadline.
I, in principle, not against it. I am against the fact that using even free (not necessarily OpenSource) works (up to music / films), during the check you must prove that you are not a camel, and you have the right to use this information. By the way, not the fact that you prove it.
And I am against the fact that gradually, at the legislative level, there are attempts at all to declare any free information out of law. Take the same free software - at least one program in any sphere has a state one. license (billing there any, monitoring)? No, it does not, at least I have not seen this. And it will not, because it does not bring a guaranteed income in the form of a purchase, and it cannot be made to pay for its use.
In addition, I am against the fact that the authors do not receive most of the profits from the sale of their works. But labels, all sorts of radioactive waste and other offices, which should be cherished and cherished by the authors, put the money in their pockets.
And on quite legal grounds.
I am not against copyright. I buy licensed discs with movies that I liked. The same applies to music. I go to the cinema. Most of the time, I don’t ignore the Donate button on the author’s website if I use his product.
But I am against middlemen. Against that trough and the system that covers this feeder.
I just do not want the authors to stop creating. And I do not want to use frankly low-quality product just because someone earns it.
I am not against copyright. I am for free information and fair reward authors.
Yes, I am against the system.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/75572/
All Articles