[clug] 'Rip!' on SBS, last Tuesday night

[Martin Schwenke]

>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Wayper <paulway at mabula.net> writes:

    >>> must... resist... urge to rant... about copyright hypocrisy...

Aren't you actually complaining about people not being willing to
*license* things under reasonable conditions?  After all, copyright
protects free software too...

    Paul> [...]  The fact that (as the documentary totals up) properly
    Paul> purchasing the rights to the samples that Girl Talk used in
    Paul> one song cost over $250,000 - comfortably over what it cost
    Paul> to buy the CDs that he got the samples off in the first
    Paul> place, one might wager - shows that this is a false promise,
    Paul> and "all rights reserved" is really "all rights are never
    Paul> going to be granted to anyone else, so don't even try".

    Paul> It's just so awfully, twistedly, viscerally, nastily wrong.

Why?  There are 2 sides to this.  The original creator of the material
says "I'm not willing to let people mess with my creation for less
that $250K".  So, either that creation is good enough that people will
pay the $250K... or they laugh and go and do their own creative thing.
People have that choice: they don't have to borrow, cover or sample
other peoples' creations.

    Paul> This post (CC) BY-NC-SA.

So, why NC?  ;-)

Anyway, there are certainly problems with copyright periods being
continuously lengthened for Disney's benefit.  There is also a problem
with corporations trying to claim copyright over a public domain
stories - I don't know the details of what Disney is alleged to have
done there...

peace & happiness,
martin