D&D General Why a PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content is a Bad Idea

[ReshiIRE]

Things go out of print all the time. Keeping works available perpetually is a very recent development in the world of publishing. Our feeling of entitlement to old works is not yet supported by history.

This is off topic - but I honestly feel that the solution to most issues in this area could be solved easily by massive change to copyright law; a way to make everyone happy.

This has been something I've been thinking about a long time - and I will note I am biased as I have been raised during the internet era and there isn't a high likelihood I will publish a book. But I've always thought that having a right to exclusively make money my entire life off a work is too much - and my estate or publisher having the ability to make money exclusively off my work for way, way after I pass away is pure insanity.

I don't know what a fair timelimit is, especially in today's age where it is possible (though not guranteed) to be able to interact with any past work as long as it's online.

But if I ever publish something, and if I were to publish something now... I think after 20 or 25 years, when I'm hopefully still around but now towards my middle age... I think that'd be enough time to have sole rights to earn money to my work. At that stage, I would hope I'd be like now, and have nothing but pride to see others enhance, remix and change my work, and not have a damn say in it.

... then again, I believe pretty much all software should be open source, and that is the area I work in, so I'm already a bit off kilter.

 

[Alzrius]

Things go out of print all the time. Keeping works available perpetually is a very recent development in the world of publishing. Our feeling of entitlement to old works is not yet supported by history.

A lot of unfortunate things used to happen, and still happen, all the time. Characterizing improvements, however recent they may be, as entitlement just because they break from historical paradigms strikes me as a rather cynical view.

 

[AnotherGuy]

This is off topic - but I honestly feel that the solution to most issues in this area could be solved easily by massive change to copyright law; a way to make everyone happy.

This has been something I've been thinking about a long time - and I will note I am biased as I have been raised during the internet era and there isn't a high likelihood I will publish a book. But I've always thought that having a right to exclusively make money my entire life off a work is too much - and my estate or publisher having the ability to make money exclusively off my work for way, way after I pass away is pure insanity.

I don't know what a fair timelimit is, especially in today's age where it is possible (though not guranteed) to be able to interact with any past work as long as it's online.

But if I ever publish something, and if I were to publish something now... I think after 20 or 25 years, when I'm hopefully still around but now towards my middle age... I think that'd be enough time to have sole rights to earn money to my work. At that stage, I would hope I'd be like now, and have nothing but pride to see others enhance, remix and change my work, and not have a damn say in it.

... then again, I believe pretty much all software should be open source, and that is the area I work in, so I'm already a bit off kilter.

Do you feel the same way about music, movies, series, art and basically any sort of innovation?

 

[ReshiIRE]

It is an improvement but it's only an improvement that happens if the right holder considers there to still be profit in publishing the work.

There's a ton of media, good and bad, that isn't easily accessible without pirating or hard work. Are we entitled to do that? Maybe, but it's not related to the issues we're discussing in relation to the petition - they are an issue in copyright lasting too long and corporations and profit-driven entities controlling a significant amount of media.

That and well.. a lot of things just get forgotten. Even with copyright reform, there's probably a lot of stuff that's going to end up forgotten.

 

[ReshiIRE]

Do you feel the same way about music, movies, series, art and basically any sort of innovation?

Yes, I thought I made that clear in my post. Hell, in regards to innovation, there's a ton of jurisdictions where patents last about two or so decades already.

 

[Raiztt]

A lot of unfortunate things used to happen, and still happen, all the time. Characterizing improvements, however recent they may be, as entitlement just because they break from historical paradigms strikes me as a rather cynical view.

Thats probably a good quote to keep around/bookmarked so that you can ensure the knife cuts both ways.

Really "interesting" strategy to use historical precedent as a determiner of acceptability ESPECIALLY given the topic this thread has been discussing.

 

[LordEntrails]

Do you feel the same way about music, movies, series, art and basically any sort of innovation?

Well, look at technology and drugs. They don't get protection for the life of the creator plus decades more. Why are books (and other such media) so special?

It's actually, to me, a really interesting idea @ReshiIRE brings up. And it does seem to highlight the huge mess IP laws are.

edit: can you imagine if all the computer related innovation had been protected like that? We would still be operating at dial-up speeds on x86 architecture. Or something like that.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Things go out of print all the time. Keeping works available perpetually is a very recent development in the world of publishing. Our feeling of entitlement to old works is not yet supported by history.

Sure, but if you can get GAZ1 through GAZ9, and GAZ11 through GAZ 20 it's not quite the same as just falling out of print due to not being profitable.

 

[Cergorach]

Things go out of print all the time. Keeping works available perpetually is a very recent development in the world of publishing. Our feeling of entitlement to old works is not yet supported by history.

For D&D it's been the case for over 20 years for older works (that don't have any copyright anymore) we have things like Project Gutenberg. The issue is with books that still have copyright, but are no longer available in print or digital is getting smaller and smaller.

The issue is not historically, it's currently. We are able to keep everything available. When we have a medium like the Internet available and people claiming anything they can think of, it's imho more important then ever to be able to check stuff yourself.

 

[Irlo]

Does it strike folks differently if it’s the authors or artists who want to stop publishing (in print or digitally) their own work — or updating and revising their work — vs. a publisher who holds the rights? Or are individual writers and artists expected to keep selling their work , in its original form, indefinitely?