# The end of a copyright experiment. RIAA shows its true colors. **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [August 29, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050 "2012-08-29T17:11:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/61 "2012-08-30T20:02:50Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > No, not wrong. Yes, wrong. I can play this game as long as you can. > [@](#): > > Yes, by creating a _general_ infrastructure Whatever the hell that means … > [@](#): > > that encourages creators in general to create and distribute works, not by forcing any particular creator to distribute works or lose his rights. In fact, this system has worked magnificently, and continues to work. We have the wealth of works enriching our culture precisely because the creators have control over how and whether works are distributed. Overall, this system incentivizes a massive boatload of creation and distribution, but part of the key is that the decision is left in the hands of the individual copyright holder. the system does not work magnificently it is broken. It limits creativity in many ways. It nees to change. It prevents artists who sample the work of other artists from coming up with new art, in the name of protecting copyright. I see copyright law as headed down the same road as patent law, [a scam used by lawyers to fleece businesses and individuals](http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57496641-38/inside-intellectual-ventures-the-most-hated-company-in-tech/). It’s time sensible people realized that not everything that is legal is moral, and that it is often very immoral. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/62 "2012-08-30T20:10:04Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > the system does not work magnificently it is broken. Only to people who want something for nothing. > [@](#): > > It limits creativity in many ways. It nees to change. It prevents artists who sample the work of other artists from coming up with new art, in the name of protecting copyright. That’s not limiting creativity and it’s no different from the situation in the pre-digital world. If you want to “sample” (i.e., copy from) someone’s work, you need to get permission, and, indeed, plenty of people are sampling with permission. The system works perfectly. Just because sampling is easier than it used to be in a technological sense is no reason to declare the system “broken.” You are in the same position you were always in. If you want to use someone else’s work, you ask for permission or you do without. There have always been people who took from other people’s work without wanting to get permission for it; nothing’s different just because digital technology exists, and their legal position shouldn’t change because it does either. > [@](#): > > I see copyright law as headed down the same road as patent law, [a scam used by lawyers to fleece businesses and individuals](http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57496641-38/inside-intellectual-ventures-the-most-hated-company-in-tech/). It’s time sensible people realized that not everything that is legal is moral, and that it is often very immoral. This is nothing but hysterical hyperbole. If you can do now what you could in 1970, then you’re no worse off, regardless of whether breaking the law has become easier. There is no scamming going on. The basic fact remains that a creator has rights and those rights should be enforced. They are legal rights in the United States, and they are also moral rights in my opinion. When someone has created something, they should (and do under our law) have the moral right to prevent uses that they object to, whether it’s sampling or use in advertising or whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/63 "2012-08-30T20:14:06Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > And lastly, the people who practice this sort of ‘ethical piracy’ aren’t the sort who just don’t want to pay for things - they just want to have the material in question. And if it eventually gets a commercial release, many of them will then go and purchase the material. While we’re volleying hypotheticals, why not try to field that one? Has a pirate who acquires a copy of X (which is not commercially available) but then purchases X when it becomes available done something wrong? Do you see harm there? And that’s why I’m torn. As the writer of a fairly obscure yet groundbreaking (in a field no one cares about) article written to a small (like tens of people, maybe 100-200 people max), I should be the one to decide whether or not to allow further copies to be made. Yet it’s those sort of articles, songs, movies, etc. that I’m most interested in having copies of. I don’t think Tuff Darts has re-released “Your Love (is Like a Nuclear Waste)” so what can I do if I want a copy? Yes I’ll pay the $.99 to iTunes if it were there but it’s not. So what if I could get it through other means if legitimate ones are not available? Very tempting. ---
**Author:** ![Doug\_K](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5ac83/32.png) [@Doug\_K](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doug_K)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/64 "2012-08-30T20:24:23Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > It limits creativity in many ways. It nees to change. It prevents artists who sample the work of other artists from coming up with new art, in the name of protecting copyright. No, it prevents nonartists from copying the work of artists and pretending it’s new art. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/65 "2012-08-30T21:01:01Z")
> [@Doug\_K](#): > > No, it prevents nonartists from copying the work of artists and pretending it’s new art. Hmm, interesting. If it is ethical and zero-harm to pirate a work that is no longer in print, is it equally ethical and zero-harm to **profit** from a work that is no longer in print? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/66 "2012-08-30T21:58:34Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > But the creators of information don’t want to give it away for free. They generally have mouths to feed and mortgages to pay. This has little to do with the creators. _They_ aren’t likely to be the copyright holder or see any money from anything sold, or lose money from anything pirated. > [@Acsenray](#): > > [QUOTE=Evil Captor] > the system does not work magnificently it is broken. Only to people who want something for nothing. [/QUOTE] No, it’s broken for people who want something and are willing to pay too. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2012, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/67 "2012-08-30T22:36:08Z")
> [@Doug\_K](#): > > No, it prevents nonartists from copying the work of artists and pretending it’s new art. Do you have any idea of what I am talking about? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/68 "2012-08-31T02:40:06Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Do you have any idea of what I am talking about? …I think he does. Do you? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/69 "2012-08-31T02:47:56Z")
…a prime example of what Doug K. is talking about: [http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Patrick+Cariou+wins+copyright+case+against+Richard+Prince+and+Gagosian/23387](http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Patrick+Cariou+wins+copyright+case+against+Richard+Prince+and+Gagosian/23387) ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/70 "2012-08-31T03:00:19Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …a prime example of what Doug K. is talking about: > > [http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Patrick+Cariou+wins+copyright+case+against+Richard+Prince+and+Gagosian/23387](http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Patrick+Cariou+wins+copyright+case+against+Richard+Prince+and+Gagosian/23387) Yes, that’s a very good example. Have you seen the so-called art? It’s just defacing a series of photographs. That’s the kind of thing one morally _should_ have to get permission to do. It’s like the work of that huckster and professional thief, Jeff Koons. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/71 "2012-08-31T03:24:35Z")
> [@Carmady](#): > > Very few people agree with me on this, but I don’t think an artist has a moral right (as opposed to a legal right) to make a work they previously released permanently unavailable. . . . Morally, I somewhat agree with you. It’s a (highly abstract) “crime against humanity” when a writer instructs the executor of his estate to “burn all my manuscripts.” It’s wrong. It’s entirely legal, but it impoverishes our entire culture. But, then, think of it this way: he might not have written it in the first place, and we are equally impoverished. > [@zoid](#): > > Or people could stop going through tortured mental gymnastics to attemt to justify what is clearly stealing. Hear hear. Theft is theft, and duplicating copyrighted files is one form of it. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/72 "2012-08-31T04:08:01Z")
…another example is Andy Baio and the disgraceful way he and his supporters attacked photographer Jay Maisel: [http://www.jeremynicholl.com/blog/2011/06/27/“jay-maisel-is-a-dick”-freetard-mob-savages-octogenarian-photographer-over-copyright/](http://www.jeremynicholl.com/blog/2011/06/27/%E2%80%9Cjay-maisel-is-a-dick%E2%80%9D-freetard-mob-savages-octogenarian-photographer-over-copyright/) [http://www.jeremynicholl.com/blog/2011/07/04/how-stockbroker-andrew-peterson-aka-thomas-hawk-smeared-photographer-jay-maisel-in-andy-baio-copyright-row/](http://www.jeremynicholl.com/blog/2011/07/04/how-stockbroker-andrew-peterson-aka-thomas-hawk-smeared-photographer-jay-maisel-in-andy-baio-copyright-row/) ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/73 "2012-08-31T04:16:30Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I think he does. Do you? In fact, I do. I was thinking more of stuff like this: [Music sampling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28music%29) As for art sampling of a similar nature, I dont see a lot of it happening. The music sampling generally is a small part of a song that is way different from the original, though I 'm sure some have simply copied songs outright. I’d hate to see all those music samplers set back. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/74 "2012-08-31T04:19:31Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Morally, I somewhat agree with you. It’s a (highly abstract) “crime against humanity” when a writer instructs the executor of his estate to “burn all my manuscripts.” It’s wrong. It’s entirely legal, but it impoverishes our entire culture. It’s legal, and immoral. Therefore the law must be changed. > [@](#): > > But, then, think of it this way: he might not have written it in the first place, and we are equally impoverished. If you had not written that sentence, I would not have had to have written this response. Which is to say, your point is pointless, on the scale of “What if Spartacus had had a Piper Cub?” I mean, if my hands were made of metal, it might mean SOMETHING. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/75 "2012-08-31T04:28:52Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > It’s legal, and immoral. Therefore the law must be changed. Immorality is one of the worst reasons to outlaw something. Who’s morals are we going to use? Because there was a time when homosexuality, adultery, and a host of other things were illegal because someone thought they were immoral. ETA: I don’t agree with even the underlying premis that it IS immoral. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/76 "2012-08-31T05:46:03Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > In fact, I do. I was thinking more of stuff like this: > > [Music sampling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28music%29) > > As for art sampling of a similar nature, I dont see a lot of it happening. The music sampling generally is a small part of a song that is way different from the original, though I 'm sure some have simply copied songs outright. I’d hate to see all those music samplers set back. …just because you aren’t familiar with “art sampling” doesn’t mean that there isn’t a lot of it happening. If you want to even consider changing copyright laws you need to consider the impact on all industries, not just “music samplers.” ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/77 "2012-08-31T06:00:38Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > There are layers of problems here. > > Some people equate piracy of intellectual property with theft. I’m not going to debate that issue, but suffice to say that I see a clear difference - one (theft) deprives the owner of property. The other (piracy) does not. > > Our objection to piracy, then, should be couched in terms of what it actually does to the owner : When someone pirates intellectual property, they deprive the owner of a sale. There’s certainly harm there, right? > > Well, not always. When the owner will not make the product commercially available - then piracy does no harm to the owner. No sale is lost, because no sale is offered. > > So while piracy in such cases is still illegal, it is not wrong in any moral or ethical sense - because it does no harm. There are reasons beyond financial that a creator may want to stop the distribution of a work. For example, Stephen King pulled a novella named ‘Rage’ because a kid shot up a school with a copy of the book in his pocket. The book is about a kid shooting up a school. I can fully understand why King wanted the book sales stopped. Another possible reason would be dissatisfaction with the work. If the creator decides that the work is not up to his or her standards, pulling it seems just fine to me. Or a creator may change their position on a work. For example, if an athiest author wrote a book based on atheism and then became religous, pulling the work seems fine to me. Slee ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/78 "2012-08-31T06:29:29Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > It’s legal, and immoral. Therefore the law must be changed. I differ. > [@](#): > > If you had not written that sentence, I would not have had to have written this response. Which is to say, your point is pointless, on the scale of “What if Spartacus had had a Piper Cub?” I mean, if my hands were made of metal, it might mean SOMETHING. I guess there’s some irony here, because, while you seem to be saying I failed to make myself clear…you are failing to make yourself clear. The world is impoverished, in a real and factual way, because Sir Richard Burton’s widow burned all his papers. The world is also impoverished, but only in an abstract and subjunctive sort of way, because Mozart died young, and might have gone on to write a lot more music. The only difference is that Mozart, had he lived, might not have written music, but, instead, could have gone on to become the greatest billiards player the world has ever known. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/79 "2012-08-31T07:37:28Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > In fact, I do. I was thinking more of stuff like this: > > [Music sampling](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28music%29) > > As for art sampling of a similar nature, I dont see a lot of it happening. The music sampling generally is a small part of a song that is way different from the original, though I 'm sure some have simply copied songs outright. I’d hate to see all those music samplers set back. I could have sworn you were talking about stuff like [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=242975). ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050/80 "2012-08-31T08:16:22Z")
…I’m a photographer: and I never understood why some people think its immoral for me to be able to decide what I can do with a photograph I’ve taken. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-end-of-a-copyright-experiment-riaa-shows-its-true-colors/633050.md?page=5)