[Update: Disney CEO apologizes, will personally donate] Berkley elementary school fined $250 for showing latest version Lion King at PTA fundraiser (1 Viewer)

[Charlie Brizzown]

#Fundraiser #WatchParty #Mandalorian @BobE’s place. $5 goes to a good cause. Free nachos.

 

[saints4eva]

Updated in original post

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Win/win for Disney

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I think there's a balance that has to be struck. In many applications, IP results for a process that requires substantial investment, innovation, and creativity/inspiration. Failing to protect that isn't good for innovation or the consumer.

But the pendulum can clearly swing too far the other way and IP becomes stifling. I don't think the foundation of US IP law contemplated some of the near-perpetuities (in the name of profits) that are being allowed under current law.

From a business/legal pov, nothing you say is wrong. My issue is that from an artistic (and maybe even tech development) pov, the IP model is a small square hole that some are trying to fit a jelly-filled basketball into
Visual art is probably the only ‘monastic’ art out there - single person in room with material and medium- most other arts are collaborative
The product of a jazz tune, or modern dance, or play is the result of visions and revisions with multiple collaborators - but those collaborators aren’t considered part of the intellectual process bc that’s much squishier from a business/legal pov
Then of course there’s the problem with major labels or publishers or producers or tech giants who own tons of IP but never once had skin in the game

IP a fine theory but the practice is fakata

 

[SystemShock]

from an artistic (and maybe even tech development) pov, the IP model

... is what puts food on the table. But you want artists to work for free.
Did you get paid for dancing? Or did you dance for free?

 

[GW93]

From a business/legal pov, nothing you say is wrong. My issue is that from an artistic (and maybe even tech development) pov, the IP model is a small square hole that some are trying to fit a jelly-filled basketball into
Visual art is probably the only ‘monastic’ art out there - single person in room with material and medium- most other arts are collaborative
The product of a jazz tune, or modern dance, or play is the result of visions and revisions with multiple collaborators - but those collaborators aren’t considered part of the intellectual process bc that’s much squishier from a business/legal pov
Then of course there’s the problem with major labels or publishers or producers or tech giants who own tons of IP but never once had skin in the game

IP a fine theory but the practice is fakata

Certainly U.S copyright and trade law could use some amending.

As Chuck pointed out, the way the law is written now requires rights holders to pretty vigorously defend them or risk losing those rights. It basically incentivizes dickishness.

And don't even get me started on how long it takes stuff to go into the public domain now.

Also,

 

[bclemms]

There's a concept in intellectual property law (including copyright and trademark) that the holder has to actively enforce the protection. It's one of those things where the copyright holder probably doesn't really desire to go enforce against a showing like this but the lawyers recommend it because they don't want to be shown to be in selective enforcement of their copyright.

Copyright laws suck. Video theft costs me so much money it basically cuts my earnings in half, if not more.

 

[superchuck500]

Copyright laws suck. Video theft costs me so much money it basically cuts my earnings in half, if not more.

I'm confused about your sentiment.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

... is what puts food on the table. But you want artists to work for free.
Did you get paid for dancing? Or did you dance for free?

What table?
So dance is probably the most extreme example of what I’m talking about so let’s use that -
The ‘biggest’ company I was in - Momix - was maybe a hair behind the 3 top earning companies at the time (and we were all way below broadway scale)
When I joined the company, the director was pretty much physically unable to physicalize his work anymore- I was essentially hired more for my creative ability than my physical ability
The creative process was endless hours of improvisation and then editing - at slip of every minute of work that was kept, there was probably 10 minutes discarded
He ‘owned’ the work even though he created none of it
This was also a major international touring company, the international agent got the lion’s share of the box, the director got a decent chunk and we got our hand to mouth salary - oh and the director would only come to Europe for the major city galas. Mostly it was 5 dancers and 2 tech
In the arts there are many other examples of the creative force not being to owners of the work

 

[bclemms]

I'm confused about your sentiment.

The laws should be just like laws for physical property. If someone steals my work then I should be able to call the police, have them arrested and be compensated for my loss.

 

[SaintJ]

There's a concept in intellectual property law (including copyright and trademark) that the holder has to actively enforce the protection. It's one of those things where the copyright holder probably doesn't really desire to go enforce against a showing like this but the lawyers recommend it because they don't want to be shown to be in selective enforcement of their copyright.

 

[jasonsw]

I think this is a win/win. Disney apologizes while still showing no matter what it will pursue copyright infringement.

 

[SystemShock]

What table?
So dance is probably the most extreme example of what I’m talking about so let’s use that -
The ‘biggest’ company I was in - Momix - was maybe a hair behind the 3 top earning companies at the time (and we were all way below broadway scale)
When I joined the company, the director was pretty much physically unable to physicalize his work anymore- I was essentially hired more for my creative ability than my physical ability
The creative process was endless hours of improvisation and then editing - at slip of every minute of work that was kept, there was probably 10 minutes discarded
He ‘owned’ the work even though he created none of it
This was also a major international touring company, the international agent got the lion’s share of the box, the director got a decent chunk and we got our hand to mouth salary - oh and the director would only come to Europe for the major city galas. Mostly it was 5 dancers and 2 tech
In the arts there are many other examples of the creative force not being to owners of the work

That's how it works everywhere. The company who hires you owns the rights to the work, being art, tech, etc.

And yet, if you think that's bad, just think how much worse it would be for artists if those corporations were able to simply copy someone's art and sell it, being a song, a book, a painting, a play, etc, and the artist who created the content never saw a single penny for their work.

 

[SystemShock]

I'm confused about your sentiment.

I think he means the copyright laws aren't good enough.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

That's how it works everywhere. The company who hires you owns the rights to the work, being art, tech, etc.

And yet, if you think that's bad, just think how much worse it would be for artists if those corporations were able to simply copy someone's art and sell it, being a song, a book, a painting, a play, etc, and the artist who created the content never saw a single penny for their work.

Not as bad is not the same as good