Recipes can be copyrighted. A couple of years ago an online magazine was shut down for taking other people’s recipes.
Now, it is HARD to enforce copyright at home for recipes, just like its hard to enforce the copy of a friend’s CD or DVD might have on his iPod. Or its hard to enforce copyright over a short book or a poem that’s easily copied. Or a cover band playing copyrighted music. But “difficult to enforce” does not equal “legal.”
(There are lots of laws its hard to enforce. From tax fraud to statutory rape to underage drinking to dozens of other violations. All those laws are under enforced. But that doesn’t make the activity legal).
You’re probably referring to Cooks Source. The issue wasn’t about whether recipes could be copyrighted (they can’t) but that the magazine ripped off the article pertaining to the recipe.
I see open source cola and open source beer recipes and laugh. They’re public domain, as are all recipes.
Oh, and I should point out that by recipe I mean the data to create the dish. If you artistically embellish the ingredients, you may have a case if it’s copied verbatim.
and again, i don’t think anyone is disputing that there is, in fact, in existence a law protecting a person’s copyright.
the resistance, as i said, was associating copyright violation with “theft”, “stealing” and “piracy” etc. Theft as a concept is fairly intuitive - to take away, and thus deprive someone of something. copying that recipe to cook a dish, however, would not be so intuitively understood as “theft”.
I somewhat agree with you, but I give it more time. If the film is more than 10 years old, I generally have no qualms with downloading it. I mean really, does anybody still make money off Fantasia, Reservoir Dogs, Citizen Kaine, the Good the Bad and the Ugly, Pulp Fiction, etc? Although it is legal in Canada to do so, so long as I am not uploading or profiting from the download, I prefer to abstain (although ten years isn’t a hard rule- I’ll sometimes download stuff 7/8/9 years old).
Those are ridiculous straw man arguments. Nobody calls those acts theft, and nobody but nobody wants to outlaw them. If you make up some bizarre, outrageous claims about what people you disagree with say that doesn’t make what you say any more correct. When you take something that you don’t have the legal rights to take it is called stealing. That’s what the word means. There are lots of different ways to steal, and that’s certainly one of them.
It’s called copyright because it is literally the legal right to decide who can make copies, how many they can make, and in what format and time frame they can do it in. If you make copies without having the copyright owner’s agreement to do so (or without otherwise following what copyright law allows for fair use) then you are indeed taking away those rights.
If you were ever to try and purchase a movie studio, you’d discover that the buildings and the institutional know-how isn’t what makes them valuable, it’s the library of old material.
Anything that’s not found in the $5 bin at the local convenience store is very likely to still be marketable.
Fine. Maybe they do make money off them. But here’s the thing. I assumed they don’t because I CANT BUY THEM. Some movies, in fact most old movies, I am simply not able to rent, buy, or otherwise view. If I can’t find it without pirating, I will pirate.