Pluralistic: “If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing” (08 Dec 2023) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
pluralistic.net

The ability to change features, prices, and availability of things you’ve already paid for is a powerful temptation to corporations.

  • @jasondjEnglish
    3•6 months ago

    I think my point is getting lost in the one pro-corporate part of it…the corporation is responsible for nearly all of the risk, and that investment is what ultimately creates the content. They absolutely do deserve some stake in its IP, just not necessarily nearly as much as they currently have.

    This is why I love new media. Low enough startup costs that small individuals and small groups could easily creat and own their own content and IP. It’s really the big investments that complicate everything.

    It used to be necessary to sell your soul to the establishment to get your content in front of a large audience, but it’s not anymore.

    And don’t get me wrong, it’s only in this specific context and conversation that I would call Google the good guys, or at least the lesser of two evils. Obviously context matters.

    • Venia SilenteEnglish
      1•6 months ago

      I think my point is getting lost in the one pro-corporate part of it…the corporation is responsible for nearly all of the risk, and that investment is what ultimately creates the content. They absolutely do deserve some stake in its IP, just not necessarily nearly as much as they currently have.

      No and no.

      the corporation is responsible for the risk

      The creators take more of a risk by going with a corporation. Corporations have hella money, they can afford to spend some on [checks notes] living wages.

      the corporations ultimately create the content

      Once again no. The creators do.

      • @jasondjEnglish
        1•6 months ago

        I’m not saying the creators don’t. You’re saying the people who bankroll it don’t. I say that’s a bit unfair.

        Yeah, the creatives don’t get reimbursed nearly as much as the (top) talent, and them not as much as the owner class. That’s a tale as old as time. I don’t think that copyright is really the demon you’re making out to be here though. It’s also worth noting that only the top talent really gets the good money. Most of the cast is also pretty unequally paid. That goes to the creative side as well…for every Spielberg or Tarentino or Vince Gilligan there are tens of hundreds of very skilled writers not getting their fair shake.

        And I think we’re mostly in agreement, I just think that whoever bankrolls should get a fair share of the profits. I think that’s a fair take. The problem isn’t the copyrights, it’s that the bankrollers are getting way more than a fair share.

        And again this is the problem new media solves. You don’t need to bend to the studios to get your content in front of a big audience…and even better, you can get your content in front of a niche audience, too, which is something the studios couldn’t really do very well. They used to be the roadblock and you had to play by their rules, and that’s no longer the case.