UK consultation? So they ask/get told by Big Daddy US Gov what to do?
I think you mis-spelled âEU Govâ.
Iâm gonna tell you how it will go:
The UK makes the consultation, which goes directly to the trash can, enacts a law that enables big media to misappropriate most orphan works with minimal effort and maximum benefit.
The End (?)
No, I didnt. While Brits like complaining about the EU, theyâre pretty eager to bend over and lick the US governments boots. Ironic eh?
If by âBritsâ you mean âthe current British governmentâ, then Iâd say you were spot-on. Also, do you talk about âPakisâ, âJapsâ and âChinksâ? Just curious.
You ever heard of the concept of a democratically elected government? Guess who elects the british government and is ultimately responsible when they fuck upâŚ
The media?
You didnât answer MY question.
I have a superb idea! As weâve all learned, the various âperformance rights agenciesâ and âcopyright collectivesâ of the world have a fantastic track record of definitely not screwing over artists who are alive, known, and (however feebly) able to advocate for their own interests. They also have a genuinely heartwarming approach to interacting with the public.
Who better to administer a slush fund of indeterminate size in the name of people who almost certainly wonât come back to collect it? Such a position of trust and honor requires the sort of people who are honest even when not being watched, and donât skim from the till, so what could possibly go wrong?
This doesnât seem fair to me. I know BoingBoing gets (understandably) frustrated with copyright law, but giving away peopleâs creations for free just because the people who made them lost their parents seems like itâs adding insult to injury. Sure, change has to start somewhere, and itâs a zero-sum game in some ways, but orphans seem like the last people you should take assets away from, not the first.
What? Itâs the creations that are orphans, not the creators??
âŚ
Never mind!
Instead of tinkering around the edges for orphan works, how about we reduce the copyright length back to a more sane length (A great deal shorter than now)
Oh wait, big business would hate that, my badâŚ
Iâve heard of this concept, but holding people given a hobsonâs choice of âelite group backed by vested interestsâ A, B or C repsonsible for what the elite decides isnât exactly fair.
Representative democracy is an oligarchy with a small amount of selection between rival factions of the oligarchy (aside from the occasional time of disruption, but that soon gets sorted out and the outside group gets coopted - look at the history of the Labour Party).
Itâs my only friend, the end.
Iâd like to ask you a simple question: Who is made responsible for Hitler? Ask anyone - especially a Brit or USian and he will tell you âthe Germansâ. He was voted to office. There was a size-able opposition, namely from the Social Democrats (SPD) but ultimately everyone was responsible for the things that they didnât prevent.
You and your fellow countrymen/women ARE responsible. You personally didnât vote for X but itâs your democratically elected government and you have to act to prevent the things done in your name. Even inaction makes you complicit.
So donât tell me, a german citizen, that you are not responsible for your government. You are. Iâm being made responsible for a government my own great-grandfather didnât vote for!
As a longtime admirer of my fatherâs ability to craft sarcasm, you, maâam/sir, are todayâs internet winner.
Simple solution. Just make registration of copyright material mandatory. And force renewal every 5 years. Any have the fee start at 100 pounds and go up by a factor 10 each renewal. Done.
No. Then you are screwing the small creator, not big companies.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
