Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   SOPA/PIPA and 'Intellectual Property'
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 256 of 303 (650819)
02-03-2012 9:12 AM


SMBC sums it up nicely

Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 257 of 303 (650863)
02-03-2012 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Tangle
02-02-2012 6:35 PM


Re: we're not there yet
But actually we only need one Netflix that holds all content. But that's a monopoly.... One way to not have a monopoly is to have many Netflix but how does that work, by limiting content to particular service providers? You can only get LW18 from NetflixA but LW21 is on NetflixB, so you have to pay two subscriptions? Dunno, but I do know that none of it works if content has no copyright.
I don't see why you'd have to limit the content. There's only one internets, but many ISP's... Just let NetflixA have whatever the want, or everything, and also let NetflixB do the same and then have the end-users pick whichever one they want. Maybe it could regional. NetflixA for people in this part of the country and NetflixB for those over there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Tangle, posted 02-02-2012 6:35 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 258 of 303 (652225)
02-13-2012 7:23 AM


Another interesting example
For those that think funding will become a problem for creators of content, I would like to point to Tim Schafer's "Double Fine". They asked the public to help them fund a game that has yet to be produced, and within 8 hours they had the required $ 400.000 they needed. Now, after about one and a half week, they reached the milestone of more than $ 1.500.000 that was donated to this project. Without anyone knowing what the final product will be like (beyond it being a point and click adventure).
Link to Kickstarter with info

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 7:58 AM Huntard has not replied
 Message 260 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 9:22 AM Huntard has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 259 of 303 (652273)
02-13-2012 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Huntard
02-13-2012 7:23 AM


Re: Another interesting example
Well put, Huntard, and I would only add that this is another example of people wanting to patronize artists they enjoy; Tim Schafer's name is one to conjure with among a lot of gamer communities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Huntard, posted 02-13-2012 7:23 AM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Perdition, posted 02-13-2012 12:26 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 260 of 303 (652286)
02-13-2012 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Huntard
02-13-2012 7:23 AM


Re: Another interesting example
For those that think funding will become a problem for creators of content, I would like to point to Tim Schafer's "Double Fine". They asked the public to help them fund a game that has yet to be produced, and within 8 hours they had the required $ 400.000 they needed. Now, after about one and a half week, they reached the milestone of more than $ 1.500.000 that was donated to this project. Without anyone knowing what the final product will be like (beyond it being a point and click adventure).
That's an interesting development, I'd like more details if you have it please.
It's worth pointing out that this was done without the need to abolish copyright as I've repeated ad nauseum throughout this thread.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the game is published - will it be given away? Who owns it? Is this just another way of raising finance and the game will be sold like all others or is it an entirely different model?

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Huntard, posted 02-13-2012 7:23 AM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 1:28 PM Tangle has not replied
 Message 263 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 2:13 PM Tangle has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 261 of 303 (652331)
02-13-2012 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by crashfrog
02-13-2012 7:58 AM


Re: Another interesting example
Ok, so established names might not have any trouble raising money. What if I had a cool idea for a game? How would I be able to convince a bunch of strangers that my idea was good enough to just give me money to create it?
Remember, if I explain too much of my idea, without copyright, someone else, who either has money or an established name, could come along and steal the whole idea, publish it faster than me and I'm left where I am.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 7:58 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 2:16 PM Perdition has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 262 of 303 (652344)
02-13-2012 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by Tangle
02-13-2012 9:22 AM


Re: Another interesting example
To answer my own question, they will not be making the game copyright free - no surprise there then - and those that fund it get the game as a Steam download when it's ready. I think it's a great idea and good luck to them.
I have a few questions along the lines of what happens if it takes 5 years to develop (a lot of games do), it needs more funding, or the game never gets published? Also what happens if it's a huge hit - is there profit sharing? And so on.
None of this has anything to do with copyright though......

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 9:22 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Huntard, posted 02-13-2012 3:02 PM Tangle has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 263 of 303 (652354)
02-13-2012 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by Tangle
02-13-2012 9:22 AM


Re: Another interesting example
It's worth pointing out that this was done without the need to abolish copyright as I've repeated ad nauseum throughout this thread.
What's puzzling about how you've repeated it is that nobody in the thread has asserted the opposite. It's a complete non sequitur.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 9:22 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 3:23 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 264 of 303 (652356)
02-13-2012 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by Perdition
02-13-2012 12:26 PM


Re: Another interesting example
Remember, if I explain too much of my idea, without copyright, someone else, who either has money or an established name, could come along and steal the whole idea, publish it faster than me and I'm left where I am.
So what? Why shouldn't the person that risked the capital and made the investment of time be the one who reaps the benefit?
You somehow take it as given that society benefits, somehow, when the Winklevoss Twins can come in after years of work have already been done and assert a copyright claim to the profits. But that's stupid. Anybody can have an idea (and how, exactly, do you "steal" an idea?) Making it work is the hard part. Why shouldn't that be where the rewards, if any, lie?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Perdition, posted 02-13-2012 12:26 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Perdition, posted 02-13-2012 4:09 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 265 of 303 (652365)
02-13-2012 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Tangle
02-13-2012 1:28 PM


Re: Another interesting example
Tangle writes:
To answer my own question, they will not be making the game copyright free - no surprise there then - and those that fund it get the game as a Steam download when it's ready. I think it's a great idea and good luck to them.
Indeed, so do I. This just shows that it is possible to come up with enough money from the public alone. Might I also point out that the average donation made to this project is $ 35 (at least it was this morning, didn't bother to check again) and that this is more than twice the minimal amount needed to receive this game for free when it's done?
I have a few questions along the lines of what happens if it takes 5 years to develop (a lot of games do)
I don't think this game will, for I don't think it will have cutting edge graphics, for one, and two, they gave an estimated release date of october 2012.
it needs more funding
They already have more than 4 times the amount they aimed for in the beginning.
or the game never gets published?
Unlikely, but in the event that happens, Tim Schafer's name will pretty much be ruined, and I don't think he'll ever be able to raise any funds again.
Also what happens if it's a huge hit - is there profit sharing?
Probably no, no. So what?
None of this has anything to do with copyright though......
Indeed, which is why I never claimed it did. I claimed this was an example of people being able to get the required funding for an idea from the public, something you guys said was impossible. You see, even if Tim Schafer had decided that he wasn't going to release this copyrighted, do you think it would've had any impact on the donations?
As an aside, perhaps this wiki article about Double Fine Adventure is also worth a read.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 1:28 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 3:45 PM Huntard has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 266 of 303 (652372)
02-13-2012 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by crashfrog
02-13-2012 2:13 PM


Re: Another interesting example
crashfrog writes:
What's puzzling about how you've repeated it is that nobody in the thread has asserted the opposite. It's a complete non sequitur.
i'm utterly speechless. So I won't speech.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 2:13 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 3:35 PM Tangle has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 267 of 303 (652374)
02-13-2012 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by Tangle
02-13-2012 3:23 PM


Re: Another interesting example
i'm utterly speechless.
I'm sorry? Did somebody assert that Kickstarter couldn't exist in a world with copyright?
Can you find that post?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Tangle, posted 02-13-2012 3:23 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 268 of 303 (652378)
02-13-2012 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Huntard
02-13-2012 3:02 PM


Re: Another interesting example
I claimed this was an example of people being able to get the required funding for an idea from the public, something you guys said was impossible. You see, even if Tim Schafer had decided that he wasn't going to release this copyrighted, do you think it would've had any impact on the donations?
And I never claimed it wasn't possible. I claimed - and still claim - that the removal of copyright would destroy Hollywood and that Lethal Weapon 18 would not get made in a world without it.
This game is great and I really hope it works for them; the fact that it's not a tech game (relatively low cost and quick development) and that Steam exists to distribute it is a great help.
But this thread is about copyright - this has nothing to do with copyright. This game is being developed under existing laws, I still doubt that it would be biilt if there was no copyright for the devlopers to protect future revenue.
I know a bit about the games industry and I would be extremely doubtful that a new game from an unknown developer could get this sort of funding or that games that take 3-5 years and $20m+ to develop (more usual than adventure games) could. i also doubt that the public would have any confidence in the model if a game got canned before release (quite normal), was absolute crap because it had already been sold or your mate also got it for free on the day of release.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Huntard, posted 02-13-2012 3:02 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by hooah212002, posted 02-13-2012 4:12 PM Tangle has not replied
 Message 273 by Huntard, posted 02-13-2012 4:19 PM Tangle has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 269 of 303 (652384)
02-13-2012 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by crashfrog
02-13-2012 2:16 PM


Re: Another interesting example
Making it work is the hard part. Why shouldn't that be where the rewards, if any, lie?
I agree that rewards should lie with the person who does the work. The problem is that work often equates to money (or is dependant on it) and without copyright, the rich and the well-funded would have a huge advantage. This would tend to concentrate power and wealth in a few hands, making it progressively harder and harder for anyone else to create anything. This would lead to a stifling of innovation; what is my motivation for developing a game, or coming up with a concept (which is a bit of work) if that effort will not be rewarded, if it will, in fact, only serve to make Activision richer?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 2:16 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Huntard, posted 02-13-2012 4:12 PM Perdition has replied
 Message 272 by crashfrog, posted 02-13-2012 4:16 PM Perdition has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 270 of 303 (652385)
02-13-2012 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by Perdition
02-13-2012 4:09 PM


Re: Another interesting example
Perdition writes:
This would tend to concentrate power and wealth in a few hands, making it progressively harder and harder for anyone else to create anything. This would lead to a stifling of innovation; what is my motivation for developing a game, or coming up with a concept (which is a bit of work) if that effort will not be rewarded, if it will, in fact, only serve to make Activision richer?
Uhm, isn't this the case now, with copyright intact?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Perdition, posted 02-13-2012 4:09 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Perdition, posted 02-13-2012 4:46 PM Huntard has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024