On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 02:54:57PM -0500, Gabriel Sechan wrote: > > > >From: "Michael O'Keefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >That is what I said too. > >You can work for food. You can work so they'll reciprocate and work for > >you. That's the barter system. Otherwise, it's money ! If you have another > >form of compensation, I'd like to hear it ? > > > > Happiness. Satisfaction. Pride. Not everything in this world is material > gain. I programed long before I did so as a career, and will continue to > do so long after. Money has nothing to do with it. I work in programming > only because it pays well. If it didn't, I'd flip burgers for a living and > still write free software in my off time. > > > >But until a system becomes available that fulfills this promsie, we are > >stuck with the one we have. > > > But its not.the nly one. Shakespear didn't have copyright. Da Vinci > didn't. Michelangelo didn't. Copyright is a very modern idea- the last > 200 years or so. Art exists without it. Entertainment exists without it. > In fact, you can argue the quality level was better before we had it, > copyright gives us quantity instead. Look at the musi industry as an > example of copyright degrading quality. Unless you think Britney Spears > and N'sync are good, in which case I pity anyone near your radio. >
And Mozart and Beethoven died in poverty. Artists wanting to make a buck is not an evil thing IMO. Wanting Mickey Mouse to last forever as a cash-cow mouse is. I would like to see copyrights last a shorter period and also not survive transfer as an asset beyond, say, one sale by the author and/or his/her estate. Also, especially in these days of digital recording, to get a copyright the author or film company or whatever should have to submit a complete digital copy to the Library of Congress so we wouldn't have all these "lost films" and massively expensive recovery projects. I'd make that requirement retroactive (TCM would have to hustle to get them all in). The present system is much too far to the big money content producers advantage. Surely it's time for someone else to have a crack at Winnie the Pooh or Mary Poppins. It's an aesthetic sin for material like that to be the sole property of a company that has a history of cheapening everything it touches. -- Lan Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Guy, SCM Specialist 858-354-0616 -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
