Pretty sure it was so publishers (printing press owners) could have a guaranteed income. Those two things were correlated at the time. Not so much anymore. Streaming/subscription mentality is like planned obsolescence for IP.
Comment on The signatures are still coming and it's already making an impact
dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 3 weeks ago
Copyright was invented so artists would be able to sell their art, and more art would be made.
When copyright is protected on a product that’s no longer sold, less art is made.
When a copyright holder stops selling their art, copyright protections should immediately cease, and they should be responsible for copyright obligations - releasing the source code to the public. Use it or lose it!
naught101@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This is the most level headed approach to IP I’ve seen. If you’re not willing to use the property you forfeit it. It’s a common contact for licensing rights for movies that forces a studio to make a movie or lose rights. That way people can’t squat on a licence to prevent others using it.
dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 3 weeks ago
Sony has to make a Spiderman movie every few years even though DVDs of the old ones are still being sold, but Ubisoft can just delete games forever and they can never be played again.
MunkyNutts@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
A good book on this is: Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity by Lawrence Lessig
naught101@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The same thing should apply to private property, especially in cities.