I agree with you but... I could take your video and edit it to make you say that patent law is good for the creativity of business. Then I would add a voiceover and make you look like a jerk supporting copyright laws. We do it all the time in political ads here in the States.
@vidvip I would love to see that actually. And to be totally honest, I would have no problem with that, it would be an interesting thing if people watched and believed it.
I'm sure at somepoint I will be taken to court for my use of P2P to get movies and TV not otherwise availlable to me.
They will claim that I've cost them some vast and unfathomable amount of money, but the truth is I've not cost them anything.
I don't have the money to go to the cinema every week, or indeed to subscribe to what ever TV channels I would need....to still get a much worse service.
The only movies I wouid pay for are the ones I already do, I'd just not see the others.
25years still seems far to long, I don't really have a figure I'm happy with...just not that one :P
Cetainly in the UK you can make your self a digital copy of a book you own, obviously you are not allowed to distribute it. I assume it's still dodgy to download a digital copy of a book you own, but there certainly hasn't been a court case and I can imagine it not going well for the publishers if there was.
I think the biggest problem with copyright law, as it now stands, is that "fair use" is so nebulously defined. For the most part, you can never be sure whether or not a certain use of copyrighted material is allowed under the "fair use" exception until a judge adjudicates, at which point it's too late. Sadly, there's no real, practical way to more clearly define "fair use". Patents on medications, however, are another story.
The ability to patent a developed technology, whether it be a treatment for AIDS or the iPhone, creates a structure whereby the innovator is able to profit on the sale of the product. Patents are irrevocably tied to capitalism. You can't have one without the other. Without patents, there is no economic incentive to innovate and without capitalism, there is no private property, real or intellectual.
@HeBreaksLate "Without patents, there is no economic incentive to innovate'
Not necessarily. Just because someone can build on your work doesn't mean it is useless. Take the iPhone for example. If that was open you would still have the MASSIVE advantage of getting to the market place with the technology FIRST. So even when the shitty knock offs of your tech are produced, you are already working on the next big thing. Thus, economic incentive to innovate.
@honestovlog The problem is that nowadays the shifty knock offs come out in a matter of weeks, not years. If the iPhone were open, why would I buy it from Apple when I could wait a month and buy the knock off for half the price? Trace that back, why would Apple develop the iPhone if they knew they'd only have a month to sell to the idiots too dumb to wait a product that took them years and millions of dollars to develop?
@HeBreaksLate People buy ipods, macbooks and iphones for a couple of reasons
1) The brand is cool. Works the same way in fashion.
2) The components themselves are expensive (more so than in the shitty knock offs) again, works the same in fashion.
3) The tech support. Apples support through genius bars ect is second to NONE.
The fact is that knock off MP3 players that rip off iphone, or ipod code happen regardless of wether it is patented. Same deal with cars. It doesn't stop the industry.
@HeBreaksLate If you are actually interested Larry Lessig wrote a book about how free culture is not only possible in a capitalist society, it actually HELPS a capitalist society.
@l0gically And would you have us throw the baby out with the bath water?
I'm not trying to say the system we have is perfect; I'm just saying that some system of protections of intellectual property rights in inexorably linked to any system of capitalism.
The biggest problems with the current system is that it preserves companies exclusive rights for too long and that patents are frequently issued for things that are simply not sufficiently inovative to warrant them.
The slide to unlock feature on the iPhone for instance.
The problem is that profiting at the expense of peoples lives is just inexcusable.
Sure they spent a huge amount of money developping AIDS treatments, but there is no good reason to not to sell them in poor countries at a price they can afford.
Sure make them expensive in wealthy countries and you still make your profit.
@Pook365 You seem to be under the misapprehension that a capitalist is supposed to give a damn about the human condition. Drug companies aren't trying to cure AIDS because it's the right thing to do. They do it because they know it'll make them filthy rich. Capitalism's only concern is profit. Government regulations can make it so that doing the right thing is more profitable (taxing negative behavior and subsidizing positive), but corporations still only care about profit.
@Pook365 But that wouldn't be capitalism. That would be communo-fascism of the kind described by Hayek in "The Road to Serfdom". If the government interposes too much in the pharmaceutical industry, AIDS research could become unprofitable, and thus no one would do it, and then we'd be worse off than we are now.
@HeBreaksLate Fair use is defined perfectly, for text. We need a law that represents the 21st century and our abilities to manipulate video in the same way that 100 years ago people could manipulate text.
@honestovlog The letter of the law from Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 is pretty damn vague. The reason why text and still photography-based fair use is more clearly defined is because we have nearly half a century of case law to refer back to. With the sampling of music, we only have about 2 decades of case law and with sampling video we have less than a decade. As more mash-ups are made and copyrights are upheld or not, it will be better defined. Blazing a trail's never easy.
@RogueBlueJay If you choose to create content that makes use of other people's copyrighted content, then you will be operating within a gray area of the law which could end poorly for you. No one is forcing you to "live against the law". It's a choice you make, as with any law you choose or choose not to obey.
I do agree that the mentality of "living against the law" is corrupting because a person who breaks one law and gets away with it is more likely to break others.
@HeBreaksLate Nope, no one is forcing you to live against the law, just as in the age of prohibition no one was forced to drink.
Just as in the age of slavery no one was forced to help slaves. Just as when people who made cheap copies of books using the printing presses were not forced to do what they did.
They did it because they believed it was necessary or because "the law, sir, is an ass." The fact is the law will get more and more extreme and both extremes are wrong.
Urgh the thing that sickens me about patenting is when people patent nature. Like Monsanto patenting seeds and running farmers out of their livelihood. It's disgusting.
I have seen A Remix Manifesto. It was very good, and I've agreed with that mentality for many year. I'm glad you brought this topic up, because it is (or should be) very close and important to us all.
And Ali, you covered this topic very well. You'll be at Vlogbrother standard very soon :)
@elffia We were?! I didn't know we had agreed on that! I know I suggested it, but I didn't think we had it set in stone. But yeah, I'll be thursday next week :)
@honestovlog no, we were just supposed to switch days this week because I had rosh hashannah. I texted sarah to ask her if you'd said yes, and she said you had... oh wellz. I'll just make a video tomorrow.
I think to some extent copyright laws have grown and grown too much in the same way people think political correctness has. Too much to like you said about cancer and AIDS etc. And I've always wondered what fair usage actually was, because it seems to be a bit of an ambigous term in itself but great video! xD
@JoshWMHS Fair use IS an ambiguous term and its because legally it is defined differently for text and video. The law needs to be updated because loads of people can edit video, just as loads of people could write 100 years ago.
Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer is a character created in a story. The story was created by Robert L. May in 1939 as part of his employment with Montgomery Ward. Mr May did not share in the enormous profit for his creation, the department store Montgomery Ward made all the profit. The original creator should profit from his own genius. Copyright is complicated. Alistair, your comments are insightful. This all made me think. Thanks.
I wonder about the incentive to create if a person can't earn a living from his efforts. Do you suppose that people who are no longer in college and/or living at home might need to be paid for things they create? Products that are not physical still have costs associated with their production and what not. There are differences of course but I don't think I would like it if you took a door from the house I built. This subject is hard for me to wrap my head around in any case. Good video.
@johnetie 1) True art is made selfishly, especially if you take what thepeter thinks to heart.
2) But what if (to take your door idea) saw your door and improved on it, made it swing faster or creak less (or whatever) would you be happy that they made something better or pissed that they STOLE. What if they inscribed on the door that it was based on your idea?
@honestovlog Hmmmm, I paint from time to time and I can honestly say I don't care if anyone sees my work or if they like it. Or did you mean selflessly? As for the door what I meant was they actually took my door away and used it on their house.
And of course copyright isn't the only issue hijacked by large corporations- another equally destructive force is software patents - they are a relatively new "invention," but they have (on top of already existing copyright law), created a very hostile climate for software development. Lest anyone just shrug their shoulders, people need to remember that software, in some form or another, affects just about everything we do.
@l0gically Same thing with biology. The cure for cancer could be right there but can't be researched because amazing broad ideas can be patented. Hell, even life can be patented these days.
Excellent points. My "Unsuspecting Co-Host" takes other YouTuber videos and people thank me for it. Apple now sells more music than people buy on CD. The music industry is going insane trying to maintain their power which is quickly going away. As far as health care in Ah-MERca is concerned? We're screwed.
Referencing Wikipedia it seems early incarnations of copyright were specifically to censor and only allow their own propaganda.
Spurring innovation was a later consideration. One I don't think can be readily proven and is even less plausible given the conditions today.
ekpil2000 2 months ago
Free culture, yay!
I love the Creative Commons and the Copyleft movement.
Not because I want all my culture to be free, but because I want it to be FREE.
Nannirk 1 year ago
I agree with you but... I could take your video and edit it to make you say that patent law is good for the creativity of business. Then I would add a voiceover and make you look like a jerk supporting copyright laws. We do it all the time in political ads here in the States.
It's a double edged sword.
Cheers and good on ya,
Thom ;)
vidvip 1 year ago
@vidvip I would love to see that actually. And to be totally honest, I would have no problem with that, it would be an interesting thing if people watched and believed it.
RogueBlueJay 1 year ago
Excellent fascinating video.
Concise and interesting to watch.
tangerinealarm 1 year ago
I'm sure at somepoint I will be taken to court for my use of P2P to get movies and TV not otherwise availlable to me.
They will claim that I've cost them some vast and unfathomable amount of money, but the truth is I've not cost them anything.
I don't have the money to go to the cinema every week, or indeed to subscribe to what ever TV channels I would need....to still get a much worse service.
The only movies I wouid pay for are the ones I already do, I'd just not see the others.
Pook365 1 year ago
I loved Fillmore! I loved this video as well. Very smart. Very articulate. I'm going to go think for a while now.
RoxinPunch 1 year ago
Ali, you're just awesome.
zottepark 1 year ago
Great video, Ali!
- Jason
crimsong19 1 year ago
Copyright should never last longer than 25 years. Period. If you can't make money within 25 years, you are full of fail.
If you own the physical copy of a book, you should be able to have a digital copy.
There is a difference between copyright & patents.
I use a creative commons on my sketches.
tetsubo57 1 year ago
@tetsubo57 Couldn't agree more.
RogueBlueJay 1 year ago
@tetsubo57
25years still seems far to long, I don't really have a figure I'm happy with...just not that one :P
Cetainly in the UK you can make your self a digital copy of a book you own, obviously you are not allowed to distribute it. I assume it's still dodgy to download a digital copy of a book you own, but there certainly hasn't been a court case and I can imagine it not going well for the publishers if there was.
Pook365 1 year ago
I think the biggest problem with copyright law, as it now stands, is that "fair use" is so nebulously defined. For the most part, you can never be sure whether or not a certain use of copyrighted material is allowed under the "fair use" exception until a judge adjudicates, at which point it's too late. Sadly, there's no real, practical way to more clearly define "fair use". Patents on medications, however, are another story.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
The ability to patent a developed technology, whether it be a treatment for AIDS or the iPhone, creates a structure whereby the innovator is able to profit on the sale of the product. Patents are irrevocably tied to capitalism. You can't have one without the other. Without patents, there is no economic incentive to innovate and without capitalism, there is no private property, real or intellectual.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate "Without patents, there is no economic incentive to innovate'
Not necessarily. Just because someone can build on your work doesn't mean it is useless. Take the iPhone for example. If that was open you would still have the MASSIVE advantage of getting to the market place with the technology FIRST. So even when the shitty knock offs of your tech are produced, you are already working on the next big thing. Thus, economic incentive to innovate.
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog The problem is that nowadays the shifty knock offs come out in a matter of weeks, not years. If the iPhone were open, why would I buy it from Apple when I could wait a month and buy the knock off for half the price? Trace that back, why would Apple develop the iPhone if they knew they'd only have a month to sell to the idiots too dumb to wait a product that took them years and millions of dollars to develop?
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate People buy ipods, macbooks and iphones for a couple of reasons
1) The brand is cool. Works the same way in fashion.
2) The components themselves are expensive (more so than in the shitty knock offs) again, works the same in fashion.
3) The tech support. Apples support through genius bars ect is second to NONE.
The fact is that knock off MP3 players that rip off iphone, or ipod code happen regardless of wether it is patented. Same deal with cars. It doesn't stop the industry.
RogueBlueJay 1 year ago
I bought an iPod touch last January, I've wanted one since they were released but could never justify the price.
It's wonderful...other than the fact you have to jailbreak it to make it work properly.
While there are certainly mp3 players with better sound, none of them offer anything comparable to the Apps...and it still has a cetain wow factor.
There is at least 100% mark up on Apple products, I sure there isn't anyone else in the technology market that makes that kind of profit.
Pook365 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate
Well they already make knock offs, patents are ignored completely.
It's not that they don't want to make fake iPhones it's that they just can't..hell Apple's people can barely make them :P
For Apple it would be no problem anyway, they have so many people willing to buy their products at any price...
Pook365 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate If you are actually interested Larry Lessig wrote a book about how free culture is not only possible in a capitalist society, it actually HELPS a capitalist society.
honestovlog 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate That's the theory. The reality is that corporations and patent trolls have trashed the system.
l0gically 1 year ago
@l0gically And would you have us throw the baby out with the bath water?
I'm not trying to say the system we have is perfect; I'm just saying that some system of protections of intellectual property rights in inexorably linked to any system of capitalism.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HeBreaksLate "And would you have us throw the baby out with the bath water?"
Saying that IP rights are linked to capitalism isn't a compelling reason to avoid fixing the major flaws that exist with the current system.
l0gically 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate
The biggest problems with the current system is that it preserves companies exclusive rights for too long and that patents are frequently issued for things that are simply not sufficiently inovative to warrant them.
The slide to unlock feature on the iPhone for instance.
Pook365 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate
The problem is that profiting at the expense of peoples lives is just inexcusable.
Sure they spent a huge amount of money developping AIDS treatments, but there is no good reason to not to sell them in poor countries at a price they can afford.
Sure make them expensive in wealthy countries and you still make your profit.
Pook365 1 year ago
@Pook365 You seem to be under the misapprehension that a capitalist is supposed to give a damn about the human condition. Drug companies aren't trying to cure AIDS because it's the right thing to do. They do it because they know it'll make them filthy rich. Capitalism's only concern is profit. Government regulations can make it so that doing the right thing is more profitable (taxing negative behavior and subsidizing positive), but corporations still only care about profit.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate
This is the problem, they don't give a shit...so they should be forced to act as if they do by laws.
Pook365 1 year ago
@Pook365 But that wouldn't be capitalism. That would be communo-fascism of the kind described by Hayek in "The Road to Serfdom". If the government interposes too much in the pharmaceutical industry, AIDS research could become unprofitable, and thus no one would do it, and then we'd be worse off than we are now.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate
Well as there are no capitalist states it would hardly be a big step.
Goverments continually pass laws that cost businesses money for the good of the people.
Pook365 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate Fair use is defined perfectly, for text. We need a law that represents the 21st century and our abilities to manipulate video in the same way that 100 years ago people could manipulate text.
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog The letter of the law from Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976 is pretty damn vague. The reason why text and still photography-based fair use is more clearly defined is because we have nearly half a century of case law to refer back to. With the sampling of music, we only have about 2 decades of case law and with sampling video we have less than a decade. As more mash-ups are made and copyrights are upheld or not, it will be better defined. Blazing a trail's never easy.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate Yeah, till then we gotta live life against the law.
RogueBlueJay 1 year ago
@RogueBlueJay If you choose to create content that makes use of other people's copyrighted content, then you will be operating within a gray area of the law which could end poorly for you. No one is forcing you to "live against the law". It's a choice you make, as with any law you choose or choose not to obey.
I do agree that the mentality of "living against the law" is corrupting because a person who breaks one law and gets away with it is more likely to break others.
HeBreaksLate 1 year ago
@HeBreaksLate Nope, no one is forcing you to live against the law, just as in the age of prohibition no one was forced to drink.
Just as in the age of slavery no one was forced to help slaves. Just as when people who made cheap copies of books using the printing presses were not forced to do what they did.
They did it because they believed it was necessary or because "the law, sir, is an ass." The fact is the law will get more and more extreme and both extremes are wrong.
RogueBlueJay 1 year ago
Brilliantly done, Ali. I'm sharing this on Facebook.
tiffismyname 1 year ago
@tiffismyname I love you. Also, sooo looking forward to seeing the movie thing.
honestovlog 1 year ago
Urgh the thing that sickens me about patenting is when people patent nature. Like Monsanto patenting seeds and running farmers out of their livelihood. It's disgusting.
hollishillis 1 year ago
@hollishillis Shouldn't be legal.
honestovlog 1 year ago
I have seen A Remix Manifesto. It was very good, and I've agreed with that mentality for many year. I'm glad you brought this topic up, because it is (or should be) very close and important to us all.
And Ali, you covered this topic very well. You'll be at Vlogbrother standard very soon :)
thepappytube 1 year ago
@thepappytube awww shucks, I try :D
honestovlog 1 year ago
this is editing talent, right here.
so good.
elffia 1 year ago
@elffia There is a reason its like 10 hours late :P
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog I believe you mean two days late, as you and I were supposed to switch days.
elffia 1 year ago
@elffia We were?! I didn't know we had agreed on that! I know I suggested it, but I didn't think we had it set in stone. But yeah, I'll be thursday next week :)
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog no, we were just supposed to switch days this week because I had rosh hashannah. I texted sarah to ask her if you'd said yes, and she said you had... oh wellz. I'll just make a video tomorrow.
elffia 1 year ago
@elffia Ok, I'm probs just an idiot :)
RogueBlueJay 1 year ago
I think to some extent copyright laws have grown and grown too much in the same way people think political correctness has. Too much to like you said about cancer and AIDS etc. And I've always wondered what fair usage actually was, because it seems to be a bit of an ambigous term in itself but great video! xD
JoshWMHS 1 year ago
@JoshWMHS Fair use IS an ambiguous term and its because legally it is defined differently for text and video. The law needs to be updated because loads of people can edit video, just as loads of people could write 100 years ago.
honestovlog 1 year ago
Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer is a character created in a story. The story was created by Robert L. May in 1939 as part of his employment with Montgomery Ward. Mr May did not share in the enormous profit for his creation, the department store Montgomery Ward made all the profit. The original creator should profit from his own genius. Copyright is complicated. Alistair, your comments are insightful. This all made me think. Thanks.
erobertfie 1 year ago
@erobertfie Same deal with happy birthday. Technically every time it is sung in a public area it is a violation.
honestovlog 1 year ago
This is the best Honestovlog video yet. Ever. Of All time. FANASTIC.
alliteration1247 1 year ago
I wonder about the incentive to create if a person can't earn a living from his efforts. Do you suppose that people who are no longer in college and/or living at home might need to be paid for things they create? Products that are not physical still have costs associated with their production and what not. There are differences of course but I don't think I would like it if you took a door from the house I built. This subject is hard for me to wrap my head around in any case. Good video.
johnetie 1 year ago
@johnetie 1) True art is made selfishly, especially if you take what thepeter thinks to heart.
2) But what if (to take your door idea) saw your door and improved on it, made it swing faster or creak less (or whatever) would you be happy that they made something better or pissed that they STOLE. What if they inscribed on the door that it was based on your idea?
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog Hmmmm, I paint from time to time and I can honestly say I don't care if anyone sees my work or if they like it. Or did you mean selflessly? As for the door what I meant was they actually took my door away and used it on their house.
johnetie 1 year ago
@johnetie hahahaha, "I've not took anything off ya I'm just spreading love for what you do." Dan Bull.
Thats the problem, intellectual property isn't stolen. Plus, nobody creates in a vacuum be it door or painting.
honestovlog 1 year ago
This is my favorite honestovlog video yet. Truly innovative and I get the point you are trying to make.
RoryBecktar 1 year ago
@RoryBecktar Its actually not that innovative. Its easy to sound smart when you are parroting smart people.
(Even that is a Randy Pauche quote :P)
honestovlog 1 year ago
And of course copyright isn't the only issue hijacked by large corporations- another equally destructive force is software patents - they are a relatively new "invention," but they have (on top of already existing copyright law), created a very hostile climate for software development. Lest anyone just shrug their shoulders, people need to remember that software, in some form or another, affects just about everything we do.
l0gically 1 year ago
@l0gically Same thing with biology. The cure for cancer could be right there but can't be researched because amazing broad ideas can be patented. Hell, even life can be patented these days.
honestovlog 1 year ago
Very good points raised Alasdir.
BarryAldridge 1 year ago
@BarryAldridge Hey! Haven't heard from you in a while. Hows things been going?
Ali
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog I have been good Ali, doing some work and chilling out where I am.
BarryAldridge 1 year ago
Excellent points. My "Unsuspecting Co-Host" takes other YouTuber videos and people thank me for it. Apple now sells more music than people buy on CD. The music industry is going insane trying to maintain their power which is quickly going away. As far as health care in Ah-MERca is concerned? We're screwed.
billtvmacon 1 year ago
@billtvmacon Maybe Brazil should produce all of our medicines cheaply for us...
alliteration1247 1 year ago
Distil it down. Heh. Tautology.
SpeakMouthWords 1 year ago
@SpeakMouthWords I didn't have to look that word up... Nope. Not even a little bit.
honestovlog 1 year ago
It's kinda weird that I watched this immediately after finishing Yugioh: The Abridged series...what with all the copyright
ohaiumby 1 year ago
@ohaiumby yugioh the abridged series is one of the greatest parodies of all time. Littlekuriboh is a genius.
blkfrhwk 1 year ago
@blkfrhwk indeed
ohaiumby 1 year ago
Fillmore was one of my favorite shows growing up.
mitchyk10 1 year ago
@mitchyk10 Thank you! I also thought it was awesome. The other one was Ocean Girl but the less said about my obsession for that show the better.
honestovlog 1 year ago
this was excellent. can you provide the link to the tedtalk at the end, please? thanks.
blkfrhwk 1 year ago
@blkfrhwk Its Larry Lessig - How Creativity is Being Strangled by the Law. If you search for that you will get it :)
honestovlog 1 year ago
@honestovlog thank you very much!
blkfrhwk 1 year ago
@blkfrhwk It is pure genius btw,
honestovlog 1 year ago
Finally! The video is live!
honestovlog 1 year ago