Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/cryptoleft
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Chainleft
@chainleft
Hot take: I know the 😎 edgy techno-left 😎 position on copyright is "intellectual property is still property" but it's pretty lame for the techno-left to accept the narrative of capitalists abolishing the only type of property that can be produced by something everyone inherently owns, and no other property.
2 replies
2 recasts
21 reactions
Thumbs Up
@thumbsup.eth
I think in the digital age copyright is more trouble than it’s worth. If you substitute paying royalties with direct support, there’s no capitalist middleman and the artist would actually make more money. It’s hard to convince people to pay for something they get for free, sure, but that’s true under capitalism as well. So why not push towards a solidarity and mutualist economy now, rather than wasting time making lawyers rich
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Chainleft
@chainleft
I think the means and outcome are being confused. You can support directly with royalties too, no need for middleman. Middleman only exists where necessary, it's the case even for patronage.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Thumbs Up
@thumbsup.eth
Royalty payment can be done directly, yes. But the facilitation of royalties as an idea is an enormously complex machine that involves entities like BMI, copyright detection tools, lawyers, legal frameworks, and at the end of course the use of force by the state. Doing the payment (as a royalty, aka per agreed upon use) directly, without that threat of force and all the bureaucracy needed to imply that force’s threat, is just patronage. So in a way, we are saying the same thing.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
