[pp.int.general] Protest certain musicians?

[Christian Hufgard]

Bernhard Schillo wrote:
> But how can copyright be good for the public at all? 

It grantes creators the right to gain money from their creativity.And it
protects GPL and CC.


> It is never good
> for the public. When we accept a "little bit" of copyright, then the
> reason for this can only be, that it's good for the artist - to get him
> to create something (which is good for the public...). But i as an
> composer and writer of music and lyrics would never again produce
> anything if i had to cope with the situation, that i got to have to make
> money with my creations in a short period and if i don't make it, then
> somebody else (probably a big company), can use it the way he wants.
r
Have you ever produced something, people willingly paied money for? And
then someone else took it, and earned that money?


> In this context we also have to talk about the right to contradict the
> defacement of the creation, which in germany is regulated by the
> "Urheberpersönlichkeitsrecht", in english the "moral rights", like the
> dictionary told me. Should these rights last longer than the
> exploitation laws? Can i contradict a special usage of my creation with
> them?
> 
> For that reasons i have suggested a short term aim and a long term aim.
> The long term aim should be the abolishing of copyrights and the short
> term aim should be the reducing them to the time i suggested and the
> full legalizing of the private copy.

No copyrights would be a perfect world for the industry - and a hell for
creators.


> I fully agree with you, that e.g. 90 Years of copyright is too long, if
> a creation got really famous. Then the creator got paid and the creation
> has become a folktune (for example). So the "folk" should be able to use
> it. 

Says who? Only because many people like my art, I use any rights
associated with it?


> I think that's your point. But to be fair to the creators (and i
> think that's nessecary if we don't want to abolish copyright
> completely), there are just two possibilitys: Either copyright is
> orientated on the lifespan of the creator or it's orientated on the
> success (when a creation is successfull and the creator got paid, then
> release it in the public domain). I can't imagine a way to measure the
> success like nessecary for possibility two, so in my opinion there only
> remains possibility one.

And right after the death of a creator, some companies arise and make
the big money. Of course only for the sake of the public.

Christian