|
|
|
| Authored by: Wol on Saturday, March 09 2013 @ 05:34 PM EST |
Patents and copyrights do not hinder competition.
What they are *supposed* to do is to allow the *creator* of a *new* market to
reserve that market temporarily to themselves. With the emphasis on the word
"new".
The problem is, all too often, badly worded patents allow the seizure of an old
market. And badly worded copyright laws prevent the creation of new markets. It
is poor *implementation* that prevents patents and copyrights doing what they
are supposed to.
And it is the American Legal System that allows such horrendous abuse - it
doesn't happen elsewhere for the most part. And where it does it's almost always
driven by America.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 10 2013 @ 03:00 AM EDT |
Patents and copyright are solely means of guaranteeing a profit for the owner
(not necessarily the creator).
Little by little, this ownership has turned things around, so the creative work
becomes a profit generator and profit becomes it's raison d'etre. Culture, in
this sense, has become an industrial product and the endless stream of
here-today-gone-tomorrow pop tunes and movies devoid of plot or depth is the
result.
Yes, money helps spread culture but it also uniforms it and robs it of the edges
that defines it.
More than that, it debases it by applying a strict monetary value to it.
Sub-cultures still exist in the (post-)industrialised world, but once the
content ownership league folds it into itself, these genuine expressions are
transformed and go from being meaningful in themselves (art) to becoming
meaningful as investments (commodity).
This culture-as-profit, while in itself a cultural expression(!), will forever
leave a dent in the global mass of cultural heritage by robbing the expression
of its soul and leaving only the empty shell behind. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
