Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes yes hell fucking yes

    It is Just Greedy Capitalist rich assholes getting advantages, the common people do not benefit. Fuck Capitalism, Fuck Copyright and Fuck Donald Trump. BTW, It should be legal to say that you want to cut off Trump's head. I need 12 more words so yeah, I hope Donald Trump dies.

  • Greedy ,selfish copyrights hurts the populace and consumers.

    Copyrights are about controlling consumer of art and entertainment for economical welfare,This is bad prostitution,A artist can make good money without copyrights,Copy eight profits ar act of greed. Copyrights can repent a movie from being shown only case the producer had problems about the technology .An estate can over charge fro a classic film to be reissued on home video tor t.V.One can gain Economical security without copyrighting .Only Under copy right ,You only owning the blank Blu- Ray and D.V.D disc and not the copy of the content ,you spend you hard earn money on,even though the company own the original property.The artist or corporate art actually legally are stealing your money and owning you.Copyright need to be eliminated,It should only be illegal to replace the artist name with your name ,plagiarizing only. Copyright and patents were about forcing citizens to serve the artist and business,so they can have an easy life at our expense .Remember Thomas Edison versus William fox? Who would late become like Edison. It's an economy around greedy selfish art and technology instead of the whole populace. Under that artist and inventor make a living serving the whole populace rather than controlling them. A person who make a copy of a work without permission of the company to make the copy to make profit ,The true pirate can be punished outside of copyrights under other laws,No ethical consumer would hurt a company or artist on a legitimate level.A consumer should be able to sell their Blu- Ray or D.V.D. Copy as long as it's sold as used .They should be able to make a privative back up,if they want to.This is not pirating ,except to th eyes of the greedy and selfish ,in the name of getting out of poverty and staying out of it.As a consumer i don't want to help any greedy person to become greedy wealthy .We need to have a democracy around everyone,with no greedy selfish copyrights and I don't wan the public to see my movie copyrights any more.Yes get the pirates who make cope to make big profits yes,but leave the small consumer alone.Most do follow this on their own,

  • This is a simple answer!_/(>.<)\_

    Seriously, why do people do this?Think of all that effort people have gone through to do this.Just imagine you produced a new song and you just released it.All that hard work you've gone through and released it on iTunes.Someone goes and records your song and downloads it onto a illegal downloading website.Thousands and millions of people download your song from this illegal website.Only 100 people a day are buying your song on iTunes.You are loosing money rapidly...
    You become bankrupt.
    If this really happened to you would you be annoyed they ruined your chance in this industry.
    "Treat others the way you want to be treated."

  • Yes, very much.

    Copyright prevents the spread of technology .
    The current laws are outdated for the digital age.
    People pay for appreciation.
    Copyright laws allow people to protect their ideas and their own creations and inventions.
    They absolutely do cause more harm than good.
    It causes certain individuals many more problems.
    - Lily

  • Copyright prevents the spread of technology.

    If we had no copyright laws, imagine all of the innovative things that would be around today. The removal of copyright would widen the range of things that can be created, and inventors can borrow ideas to have a much greater chance of making a breakthrough. Overall, humanity will be much more technologically and creatively advanced if copyright laws never existed.

  • The current laws are outdated for the digital age.

    Many people who produce media, especially people who use websites for the sharing of their media, get some kind of strike against copyright. Media is used for a variety of reasons and copyright is getting in the way. The purpose of Copyright is so that people don't get money for reproducing or copying someone else's work and claiming it as their own (plagiarism), but are these laws one hundred percent updated to the modern era. No, they are not.
    Many companies and people--including celebrities--tend to partner with websites to issue copyright strikes. However, the unfortunate part is that these websites have to partner with these people, or else they'd probably get sued or even shutdown. But is a person copying someone's work by showcasing it on their social media or posting it on their YouTube Channel? It really depends on the nature of the video. If you're posting the entirety of a movie, song, or TV show on a website, then that should definitely be against copyright, because the creator is probably not getting any money for their creation. But should it be an offence to place a song or part of a movie in the background of a video? No, because I am not taking you work and I am not selling it. People are not focusing on your work in the background. They're focusing on what I am doing in the foreground. As long as I give credit to the original creator in my video or the description or caption I should be fine to put it in. What am I doing wrong? If anything I am promoting your work by showing it in the background of my creation. I am encouraging others to buy it by showing it to them. Do you not want promotion?
    Another issue is that copyright lasts for longer than needed. Copyright lasts for roughly seventy years, which is insane. Why would you need to get money for something made seventy years ago? What is a fair amount of time. About forty years would be appropriate and then an additional additional five years can be added if the creator(s) are still making at least ten percent of the highest prophet. Re-releases will not add an additional forty years to the copyright time.
    With the digital age changing the way that people view and produce media, the copyright laws of today definitely need some updating. The DMCA was created in 1996, before many of the major media platforms on the internet were created. We need and update to go with modern media on the internet.

  • Yes, why not?

    Basically it's simple, the government is basically taking away people's creativity and there wantings. People want to just listen to good music of their taste, and I believe that is truly what the government should believe in as well. Creativity is a key to art, music, and movies; maybe the copyright system is the reason so many people are so much less creative.

  • People Pay for Appreciation

    Most of the people say that copyright law is more of harm to the society rather than benefit to the society. Well you are wrong. People pay for appreciation. To appreciate the work of the artist. The copyright law is also the motivation for artists to work more on their valuable projects. If there is no copyright, then there is no more creativity. Everything would be the same thing and people will get bore of the same rhythm or same idea.

  • Yes! It's retrogressive.

    The argument that patents and copyright motivate creativity is true but is an argument forwarded based on a very narrow view. These laws only motivate selfish, resource privilleged would-be inventors and authors whose main interest is not human welfare but wealth. Imagine if the such laws had been introduced at the birth of humanity, how many things would have been copyrighted? Cooking food, wearing clothes, building homes, e.T.C. Luckily, these things were never patented and man exploited them to the fullest. These earlier inventions show that copyright is not the biggest motivating factor in creativity and invention, to say the least it is a very selfish, trivial one. The real inspiration for invention is the existence of challenges met by the availability of ideas plus resources. If anything, removing the copyright altogether would stir up even more creativity in the sense that awareness that thousands more people could be making the same thing you are making is bound to inspire to worker hard to be the best.

  • Yes, derivative works are what drives culture.

    The current law clashes with the human creative instinct. All human creativity is derivative to some extent; all are creations are ultimately inspired by previous exposure to stimuli, including the work of others. The model of copyright, on the other hand, is based on the premise that all legitimate creativity is 100% unique, which as we know from countless works of fan fiction and videos on YouTube is false. Copyright claims on unauthorized derivative works effectively amount to censorship.

  • Copyrights Intended to Protect Owners

    Copyright laws are intended to protect the owners of intellectual property, art, movies and music from people making money off of their stuff. Copyright laws don't do more harm than good. It is those people who download stuff to the Internet illegally that harm copyright holders. Places like YouTube are inundated with copyrighted images daily that should be taken down.

  • No and yes.

    Copyright laws in theory are important and should be strictly enforced, but the current law in the U.S. is excessive in the length of time protection is granted. Copyright protection should be more similar to patent protection, maybe just a few years more. The current law is a monstrosity and something the current populist movement should look at reforming.

  • No I don't think so.

    You people who are saying yes, in my opinion are automatically lazy. Imagine you actually put yourself into doing something and someone just steals it because they are to lazy to do there own thing. How would you feel? Oh yeah you would feel pretty upset wouldn't you. They have this law for a reason so people actually have to do there own crap instead of stealing someone elses.

  • This is a simple answer!_/(>.<)\_

    Seriously, why do people do this?Think of all that effort people have gone through to do this.Just imagine you produced a new song and you just released it.All that hard work you've gone through and released it on iTunes.Someone goes and records your song and downloads it onto a illegal downloading website.Thousands and millions of people download your song from this illegal website.Only 100 people a day are buying your song on iTunes.You are loosing money rapidly...
    You become bankrupt.
    If this really happened to you would you be annoyed they ruined your chance in this industry.
    "Treat others the way you want to be treated."

  • Yes, why not?

    Basically it's simple, the government is basically taking away people's creativity and there wantings. People want to just listen to good music of their taste, and I believe that is truly what the government should believe in as well. Creativity is a key to art, music, and movies; maybe the copyright system is the reason so many people are so much less creative.

  • There is no reason to encourage a generation who posses a false sense of entitlement to free content over the Internet.

    Copyright owners should not be deprived of the basic rights to claim ownership to works they have created. By eliminating copyright right laws altogether, it diminishes the incentive to create and innovate, knowing that your work can be copied without being attributed. The existence of copyright laws help regulate the use and distribution of these 'expressions' of ideas and should continue doing so.

  • No I do not think so.

    Copyright laws allow people to protect their ideas and own creations rather than get them stolen and sold of as their own work. It protects people making it do more good than it does harm. Yes at times it may cause certian individuals more problems, but overall the intention of them is good.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.