Skip to main content
This week, Jerry Pournelle writes:



Three Years of the DMCA



You will find the Electronic Freedom Foundation report at http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20020503_dmca_consequences.pdf. It's depressing. The Digital Millennium Communications Act has been expensive, and most of its effects have been unintended. It didn't accomplish what it said it was intended to do, and it has harmed commerce and the growth of the industry. So what else is new?



Bob Thompson says the purpose of the DMCA was to get us used to prior restraint censorship, and it has done that well: Look at the fear generated by the act.



And every month the movie studios and the music publishers come up with another mad scheme to make copy protection more obtrusive, with heavier criminal penalties for getting around even stupid copy protection, and no concern whatever for matters such as free speech, fair use, or for that matter, the protection of the rights of authors and artists. All the new bills in Congress seem aimed at extending the rights of corporations to Mickey Mouse and similar creations of authors already dead, and none at making the corporations renegotiate often brutally confiscatory contracts that leave the actual creators and their families with little to nothing.



The Constitution allows for the creation of monopolies as a means of encouraging creative activity. I don't see how anyone is given an incentive to do more creating by having a copyright extended long after the artist's death -- particularly when the artist is already dead, and the copyright is held by a corporation. But once again, corporate interests are represented by big law and lobby firms. The public doesn't have such assets.
All this, again, illustrates why I distrust government intervention in the marketplace. It is inevitably destructive to that marketplace, something not recognized by those who keep crying for more and more government regulation, especially that proposed by Disney's Senator. Even Adam Smith knew that, a long time ago.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Have I mentioned I saw Monsters vs. Aliens?

It’s possible that Pixar is becoming a blight on the world of animation. Yes, they do some really great work ( The Incredibles , Ratatouille ), but they’ve also done some clunkers ( Cars , Wall-E ). Their greatest sin, though, is that they apparently radiate a variation of the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field, so that any other animated film – especially if done with CG – is automatically judged inferior. There is some justification to this, but you don’t see every live action film being compared to, say, the films of Ingmar Bergman (well, except by brooding people wearing dark glasses sitting in dim coffee shops smoking clove cigarettes discussing cinema, damn you ). In the traditional film world, it’s accepted that different artists turn out different products. In the animated world, everyone is supposed to match or surpass Pixar, or so it seems. Needless to say, that’s just a crock. Monsters vs Aliens is to your typical Pixar production as Spielberg is to Scorsese. And I h...
2 comments
Read more

Rogan

The entire Joe Rogan controversy is an example of the kids being left in charge and the adults refusing to teach them any better. I’m not a regular consumer of podcasts. There are a couple I listen to from time to time, but nothing on a regular basis. While I’ve caught a few minutes of the Joe Rogan Experience on YouTube, I’ve never listened to his podcast. One of the primary reasons for that is that you have to subscribe to Spotify to do so, and I prefer Qobuz, Tidal, or even Amazon Music. Rogan is behind Spotify’s paywall and that’s that. But the nature of the fight is about more than who does or does not listen to Rogan. This fight goes to the very nature of the First Amendment and the fundamental concept of the United States. And yes, I understand that cuts both ways. What’s his name and Joni Mitchell are free to yank their creations from Spotify, no ifs, ands, or buts. I’m not denying their right, I’m questioning their reasons. Rogan talks to people. He does so largely unfiltered....
Post a Comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more