It's great for finding people who came just to complain when they have no dog in this fight either, and I don't just mean the non-TL people, but the people who haven't written anything but still complain about this, funny stuff, let's you fill out that block list easier.
I don't know how much you frequent the internet and media, but brainrot is what the slop, the nonsensical, the stupid, the content for content's sake is called nowadays. Basically just low quality trash.
<Hefts executioner's axe with malicious intent
Technically there's a grand and tyrannical 9 rules. But yeah, they pretty much boil down to those three if you're not one of the people who forced us to get more detailed with 'em.
I always laugh when I see people making this particular strawman. They love it so much, and it's just so ridiculous. Nobody is going to take you seriously saying that we're going to ban rape porn, when I'm a mod and literally several of my own most recent stories in my snippets thread are rape porn. That I wrote, and posted here.
I write a book, taking (possibly optimistically) 2000 hours (1 year at 40 hours/week) to write it. I then publish it, and try to sell copies for $10 each; following your assumption of "a world where making a copy of such things is so absurdly easy", which is a reasonable assumption, I'll ignore the costs of publishing and selling. If I manage to sell 4000 copies, maybe my book is good enough that that's a reasonable expectation, then I'll have made $40,000 for my 2000 hours of work, a decent wage of $20/hour.
I'm not educated in Fivehead Mathematics either, so I'm right with you.
You, uh, you do realise that this supposed "major societal change" is how things already operate around here, right? It's called commissions and patreon/subscribestar, aka getting paid beforehand or getting paid during the writing process.
You lived the existing copyright system absolutely failing you, getting a pittance when you were in the right, and that's evidence the current system is good somehow? What the fuck?
Context. He's talking to people who are saying that it should be less protective, and pointing out that it's barely enough to sort of do the job as it is. It's good in the sense that it shouldn't be removed, not in the sense that it should go unchanged.
![[template]](/data/avatars/m/94/94516.jpg?1715145430){kind=avatar}
According to other guys in the thread, he shouldn't have had any chance to claim the work as his, period. He should had been happy that he made a contribution to culture, and he shouldn't be allowed to paywall it. Someone else copying his work should actually be praised since they are helping spread the culture (he was on a small editorial so he wouldn't have managed to spread his work by a lot anyways, and hey, they MAY have bought a copy of the book, it is theirs to do as they want now!). The guy who stole his work isn't in the wrong, he should live by just the bare minimum that the goverment gives so he doesn't die (and piss off if his goverment doesn't do that), and be happy that he got 10$ from that dude who bought the book.
If the existing copyright system didn't exist, I would've gotten NOTHING. If I hadn't owned the copyright, we would've had NO legal justification to sue, the same as if you tried to sue JKR for publishing Harry Potter, for example. In fact, they'd probably fine you for wasting the court's time.
Riiight, ""the"" ""guy"", yeahh...
If you want my actual position on copyright, I'd say it should have a duration strictly less than patent duration and it should strictly be a monopoly on making money off a work, not any control on distribution or remixing. But I'll argue all day for the extremist no-copyright position for as long as we have to cope with the current dysfunctional mess instead.
It's no joke, English is my third language, the first 2 are Spanish and Italian, so I can't really keep up with every new expression that people decide to invent on the internet, if I don't ask I can't find out about these things so I'm sorry if my question bothered you in any way, thanks for clarifying it for me.
Still obnoxious as fuck to see that TL shilling Patreon for $5 for more translations. Like… who tf? Why?<Hefts executioner's axe with malicious intent
"I thought you liked the guy, but if you insist..."
Technically there's a grand and tyrannical 9 rules. But yeah, they pretty much boil down to those three if you're not one of the people who forced us to get more detailed with 'em.
I always laugh when I see people making this particular strawman. They love it so much, and it's just so ridiculous. Nobody is going to take you seriously saying that we're going to ban rape porn, when I'm a mod and literally several of my own most recent stories in my snippets thread are rape porn. That I wrote, and posted here.
This statement, in particular, falsifies as soon as a potential reader exists who either
>putting effort into writing a story and asking for donations
The funny thing is that whenever someone tries to run the numbers, monopoly rights generally come out as stifling innovation and creativity. As monopolies usually do, as a matter of fact. "Funny" how that dynamic manages to persist, almost like it might be the expected result with monopolies.
This is more of an argument against the paygating of basic human rights than an argument for the copyright system.
Monopolies as they are commonly defined stifle imagination, intellectual property rights as they are commonly defined spur innovation. You have not yet actually established that given the drastically different effects to innovation each side has, why intellectual property rights are de facto monopolies, all your arguments against intellectual property are really anti monopoly arguments (which I agree with), it is the whole "intellectual property rights are monopolies" part that you have not really argued properly. Monopolies rely on not having a similar substitute available, intellectual property such as a book has substitutes like other books in the same genre, so they are not a monopoly.
Your analysis is flawed.
I am completely confident you have no clue why current copyright law is the way it is. It certainly isn't for reasons of benefiting authors.
Genre-defining/progenitor works captured by monopolists get to troll a lot with that.
There is no such thing as a sufficiently-similar substitute for a story. Even translations differ enough to not be the same (and copyright legislation even sees that the same way).
The GNU page I linked earlier raised the important distinction with trademarks and specifically used that difference as argument for why the very conflation concept of "intellectual property" is harmful. It blurs the line to the point where the object of discussion is unclear.
That however is unacceptable. If someone reverse-engineers it or recreates it from scratch, they should not have to fear monopolists causing them problems.
Trademarks are barely a problem, literally just assign them UUIDs or business numbers and that's good-enough. It's supposed to be a measure against impersonation for product provenance.
So, a peak behind the curtain: we (mods) have been aware of the posting of translations for a while, and had various thoughts on it, but the general consensus was that it was in general a small issue that didn't really require any action if it didn't grow much larger. We reconvened on the topic a couple times, and came away with the same general decision.
Points radar gun at goalposts
If humans were computers, this would work as well as you think. Because humans find it orders of magnitude easier to remember "Snickers" than "A38E-560F-88AD-3432", it does not.
Sure, that's an okay way to think of it, although reducing my situation down to just "[Poverty]" seems a little... callous? I don't really like that, tbh; at least humanize me a LITTLE bit. There's a person behind the screen, y'know?
