this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
305 points (96.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43946 readers
645 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes, there are some theories why copyrights or trademarks might be good ideas.
Trademarks, for example, allow a company with a good reputation to avoid having their reputation be tarnished by someone imitating them but using lower quality goods. That seems reasonable. But, they're often abused so that a company can use their trademark to avoid having someone criticize them.
Copyright is the ridiculous one. Ok, maybe there's some bargain to be struck here. Maybe it actually does incentivize someone to create a work of art if they know they can control it for a short time. And, maybe the public benefits from that because that thing gets made, and (just as importantly) becomes part of the public domain in a reasonable time.
But, copyrights lasting a century? That's absurd. That slows down progress because it locks things out of the public domain until a point where they're no longer relevant. It disincentivize someone from creating something new, when they know they can milk the old one for decades instead.
Importantly though, none of these things is necessary for progress. The sistine chapel was painted without the benefit of copyright. AFAIK, there was no patent for the printing press. And the first things printed on it weren't protected by copyright.