Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 4951155" data-attributes="member: 15538">My argument is not predicated on the idea that an item being temporarily unavailable makes it immediately available for download. And Disney is entitled to create scarcity, because that is a right to profit from their copyright. Your second example is more interesting.Of course, I never said, "It is not available, THEREFORE you may download it." What I said was intentionally making something unavailable was not a right of the creator. In fact, the less physically available The Song of the South is to watch, the more and more defensible it becomes for documentarians, libraries, etc. to copy portions of it for reference purposes. And if Disney wished to come forward and say, "We desire to NEVER sell the Song of the South because of its racist implications," then their case against infringement becomes weaker against any infringement against that movie.Of course, Disney did make an unadvertised and small release of the Song of the South. Only prudent, really. Even if it were possible to entirely squelch a work, it is, as I noted, not Constitutionally based. Where did I say things can be copied willy-nilly?A general point: it is a basic underpinning of the US copyright laws, which owed their authority to a clause in the Constitution, that copyright protects a creator's right to profit so that society will benefit from their creativity. If society entirely lacks benefit from a given work, then there is no Constitutional authority to grant the right to the creator in some absolute sense, and the public good, freedom of speech, and privacy laws kick in.</blockquote>

Verification