i thought it said: "The most popular guitar teacher on YouTube saw his more than 100 videos yanked from the site. The reason: a music company accused him of copyright infringement for an instructional video on how to play a Rolling Stones song." it looks to me like it actually did happen. the music industry thinks you are stealing when you teach people how to play guitar. lets take a utilitarian perspective here. do you not see the public gain from the free exchange of information? it is great for people to have access to information. copyright is an obstruction to progress. sure, copyright holders might not like it, but so what? like you said to the author who didnt want his book in puvblic libraries, fugg em. there is a benefir to society when in formation gets around. even if that is just a guitar lesson. again, they do object! "a music company accused him of copyright infringement for an instructional video on how to play a Rolling Stones song." i know and they do, they even go after people who transcribed the tabs by ear. they are basically saying: "if you write down a certain piece of info in your head, you cannot let your friends see it". ridiculous. that is nuts. the digital millennium copyright act is incredibly oppressive, and was recently pushed through, backed by stooges of the music and movie industry. they send people threatening letters for saying the following string of numbers: 09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0, because they can be used to decode and copy hddvds. they are claiming to own numbers, patterns of information, and restricting exchange of information. it is nuts.
The giant flaw is that you have steadfastly refused to address the problem of compensating the creators for their work. That's what copyright is all about, not hampering the flow of information, which is your smokescreen. What you propose will never fly because it robs the creators of intellectual property which is a tangible item.
ok, well let me ask you this. do you think it is unethical to spread the solutions to magic tricks, which magicians desperately do not want you to do, or to spread great recipes? do you think spreading these things causes undue harm to chefs and magicians? would you agree that a recipe is a piece of intellectual property that may have taken quite a bit of effort to produce, and because of that, do you feel like it wouldnt be right to share that recipe and allow me to copy it? why or why not?
Asked and answered already. Your magic tricks and recipies are in the public domain and not protected by copyright. Now, if you published your tricks and recipies in a book, I could buy the book and write down the recipe or tell the trick to someone on the phone. That is fair use. What I cannot do is photocopy the trick and cookbook and give it or sell it to someone. Why do you refuse to understand the difference between an illegal duplication of an copyrighted original and a handwritten (or memorized) summary or adaptation which is legal fair use of a copyrighted work?
as i mentioned before, it is absolutely not necessary to be published for copyright to apply. so, if i ask for the recipe, you can handwrite it out for me and it is magically not stealing? or am i confused? and you cannot photocopy a recipe, but i am free to memorize it. i dont eally understand the difference. a 1/2 cup baking soda is 1/2 baking soda whether i memorize it or photocopy it. you are swaying you can steal copies of stuff, but not if you leave paper trail?
i have noticed that according to the us copyright office, one of the things you can own is: "pantomimes and choreographic works" please, if you see anyone doing a moonwalk, please tackle them and tell them to stop stealing.
But only published work is really ever pursued legally. Many people choose to give their work away even though they are technically protected. Many others choose to protect their intellectual property rights and they formally apply for copyright protection. It's not magic, it is called fair use and I've explained it and posted its definition for you multiple times. Please don't be obtuse. Yes you do. A child can understand it. You are just arguing for the sake of argument.
You 2 (Red and Martin) are so funny. You're like an old married couple (and I mean that affectionately). You argue about any and everything in every Free Speech thread. Or so it seems. :lol:
