Re: (US) Free speech ./. (c)

On Mon, Aug 02, 1999, John Lederer <johnl[_at_]ibm.net> wrote:
>
> It also, I think, is starting to show technological cracks. The origins
> of copyright, I think (I am no expert), lay in the relatively large
> capital investment of setting type and creating printing plates. As
> that investment goes down by technological advances like the Internet,
> the need for extensive monopolies declines.
>
> Of course, the counter argument is the huge investment Hollywood makes
> to create a movie-- but then I am really not sure that a primary aim of
> the copyright laws was to protect Darth Vader's dialogue, or protect a
> copy of a Power Ranger on a McDonald's cup.<c>
>
> I suspect others have a much better knowledge on the history of
> copyright, the First amendment and government censorship than I.

This isn't about the cost of production, any longer, maybe as our forefathers envisioned. It is now all about the relative value of the ideas portrayed. I think Darth Vader's dialogue has a value in our society. Just look at the collector's marketplace. Advances in technology may mean the medium is less expensive to use, but this only makes the content more valuable.

We are allowed to parody things, it just come down to reuse of what someone has thought and created. Free speech is more about original ideas than the regurgitation of what has come before. So I think there is no problem with the co-existence of the two things. If you want to put somebody's .wav file or .mov file on your webpage, pay the piper.

C :-)

Craig Hayward
<chayward[_at_]hbmaynard.com> Received on Tue Aug 03 1999 - 17:55:36 GMT