I would add that piracy itself becomes a vector for "the endless conversion of financial superiority into other forms of dominance". The already suffering little guy gets pirated to right out of existence, while the big boys have the financial and legal padding to be unaffected, by shifting the harm to the little guys working for them.
So, arguably, even given the evils of copyright, piracy only magnifies the problem exponentially.
Weaponized monetization is indeed an evil, but two wrongs don't make a right. Eliminating copyright eliminates one of the only tools the independent creator has, but it has little to no effect on the big boys. They'll always find ways to extort.
// , “It is not so important to be serious as it is to be serious about the important things. The monkey wears an expression of seriousness... but the monkey is serious because he itches."(No/No)
And the ol' pirates continue to surprise me with how far up they can punch.
But yes, I guess it's plausible that this kind of thing ends up benefiting the big dogs. On the whole the deeper pocketed firms could benefit from getting bloody noses if it means they get industry dominance if the same phenomenon that bloodied their noses breaks the necks of their smaller competition.
Then the bigger firms could hire the smaller competition as ghost writers (or do acquihires) and make a stranglehold.
I just want to make it clear that while I understand the practical rationale, in terms of financial incentives, for certain kinds of copyright, I do not consider that my words or thoughts have some kind of natural, inherent right not to be repeated, regardless of the medium.
Some comments have been hidden by the post's author - find out more
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I would add that piracy itself becomes a vector for "the endless conversion of financial superiority into other forms of dominance". The already suffering little guy gets pirated to right out of existence, while the big boys have the financial and legal padding to be unaffected, by shifting the harm to the little guys working for them.
So, arguably, even given the evils of copyright, piracy only magnifies the problem exponentially.
Weaponized monetization is indeed an evil, but two wrongs don't make a right. Eliminating copyright eliminates one of the only tools the independent creator has, but it has little to no effect on the big boys. They'll always find ways to extort.
That they will.
And the ol' pirates continue to surprise me with how far up they can punch.
But yes, I guess it's plausible that this kind of thing ends up benefiting the big dogs. On the whole the deeper pocketed firms could benefit from getting bloody noses if it means they get industry dominance if the same phenomenon that bloodied their noses breaks the necks of their smaller competition.
Then the bigger firms could hire the smaller competition as ghost writers (or do acquihires) and make a stranglehold.
I just want to make it clear that while I understand the practical rationale, in terms of financial incentives, for certain kinds of copyright, I do not consider that my words or thoughts have some kind of natural, inherent right not to be repeated, regardless of the medium.