Home

Advisory:  I oppose SOPA/PIPA/SOPAPILLA, whatever they're calling it this week.  Not because I support pirates, but because chopping off the head is a poor way to fix a sore throat.

I oppose eternal copyright, as Disney is trying to do with Uncle Walt's stuff.  I think it's perfectly reasonable to have 20 year increments, renewable during the author's life, then once afterward, for descendents.  For corporate created works we could go with 50 years one time.  This is close to what the law used to be.  Patents are currently 20 years, and renewal depends on several factors.

At the far end are the type of people who say, "No one has proven copyright is needed," or "intellectual property is capitalist bullshit." I'm going to be blunt here:  These people are retards* who are incapable of creative endeavor, whining that they waaaaaannt it and their intellectual betters must give it to them for free.  They're almost always losers who are incapable of amounting to anything, and will also tell you how valuable their unskilled labor is, even if it could be performed by a half-trained monkey.

There's also "Information wants to be free" (whatever the FUCK that means, anthropomorphizing abstract ideas), or "you're making it illegal for me to write words on my own paper." 

No, I'm making it illegal for you to write MY PARTICULAR ARRANGEMENT of words on your own paper AND SELL IT.

I even saw an amusing argument that for "200,000 years" there was "no intellectual property, and the human race did fine."

1:  do you really want to go back to squatting in caves?

B)  Actually, there was patronage for the latter part.

III] for the earlier part, the artist, let's say, a flintknapper, was supported by the village--he knapped tools, they brought him food, clothing, etc, in barter.  He made them for that village only, unless there was an agreement for trade elsewhere.  As far as ideas go, if he came up with an improved spearpoint, for example, that was proprietary information to him, and his apprentice.  It wasn't freely divulged to competing tribes.  That could be disastrous.  If it was shared with competing tribes at a gathering, it was expected they would offer something in kind--gifts of food, valuables, other ideas.

So, yes, respect for the work of creators is a long-established human practice, as is compensating them for their creativity, and the product thereby is certainly considered valuable and guarded.

Here's the check:  if the created work or mechanism is not valuable, why do you want to be able to copy it?  If it's not worth anything, you don't want it and don't need it, right?

If you think you need to be able to copy it, and will argue the point, then by definition it has value to you.

So, as an author, here's the deal:  If my ideas are not valuable, then you don't need to read my books.  If you wish to read my books, there are some available as free downloads, and others you must pay for, for the time being.  If you will seek them out for free, then you're saying you don't wish to pay me for my work, but you're still admitting it has value to you, or you wouldn't bother.

Yes, I expect to be paid for my "Capitalist bullshit."  If I don't get paid enough, I won't do it. (This isn't a threat, just an observation of reality. There are other ways I can make money.  Money I need to put a roof over my head and food in my belly, and those of my kids.)

Opposing the MAFIAA's latest fascist idiocy doesn't mean I support locusts.  I hold each in equal contempt.

The best thing you can do for this, if you don't already, is to make sure you do support artists, authors, creators, inventors you like, with money, to encourage them to produce more.  And yes, in time, it should all revert to the public.  But if you want the golden goose to lay those eggs, you need to feed it.

Go out and support the arts, with filthy lucre!

*Yes, I used the word "retard" with intent, in its definition of "a generalized disorder appearing before adulthood, characterized by significantly impaired cognitive functioning and deficits in two or more adaptive behaviors. It has historically been defined as an Intelligence Quotient score under 70."  Though if it bothers you, feel free to substitute, "Socialist."