Quote:
Originally Posted by Halcyon
Creative commons is not a replacement for copyright and I'm not sure how it affects fair use or what it has to do with torrents. Illigal is still illegal.
|
there is no way anyone can claim that creative common is a replacement for copyright nor have i ever made such a statement. The fact that fair use was defined in the original copyright act and defined as exemption from the normal exclusive rights granted by the act.
Creative common was created out of the intelectual papers which descibed and condemed the overstepping of current copyright laws to control content distribution. The squashing of fair use free expression (parody, commentary). It was an attempt to prove that copyright holders didn't need to dictetorially control content (stomping all over fair use) and could even extend those rights beyond those granted explictly by the law and still make money.
Quote:
|
To me, is much more relevant for the mash up culture. Where art and artist can encourage others to remix and re-use. But it is a CHOICE by the copyright owner, no?
|
the point i am making is that obama seems to get it, which means he is going to be more fair use friendly. Right like access shifting (currently not yet established by case law) would be more likely to be respected by future laws.
Quote:
In essence, Sponsors & TGP's have been embracing a similar idea for a long time. "You can use this content that I designate, but give me credit/a link back."
Creative Commons simply allows these things to happen without lawyers, contracts, etc. But the scope of the license is still CHOSEN by the content owner.
|
i am not arguing with you about the fundamentals of the liciencing schema, i understand them quite well. I just know the history behind them, the principles they were founded on and the consequences of the government finally getting those principles.
Fair use has gotten a significant advocate.