16 Jul
2010
16 Jul
'10
1:50 a.m.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:25 PM, drew Roberts <zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
On Thursday 15 July 2010 14:50:20 you wrote:
i was being partly tongue in cheek, naturally.
surely its not that dichotomous. one middle
ground:
* don't force support against anyone's will
* use extreme force against anyone who redistributes (i.e. the creator
is the only legal distributor)
That's the problem right there. You can't even prove damages and yet you
think "extreme force" will be necessary to get people to comply. Seriously, shall we have the death penalty for
distributors? What about for
performers? What about for unintentional performers?
If not the death penalty, what about 4 or 5 years in jail?
IF copyright was restricted to the creator AND limited in duration to
a single-digit number of years AND utterly non-transferable (even to
next-of-kin) AND intent had to proven THEN i'd say that maybe 6 months
or a year in jail, with options for first offenses and/or parole
and/or scope of damages affecting the sentence?
unintentional distribution and/or performance is a hard case that,
like so many other gray areas, would have to be decided by a court.
then of course is the question of what constitutes distribution or
performance, but these questions exist in the current state of affairs
and will always represent some kind of tradeoff. 5 seconds? 2 bars?
chord changes but not melody, or vice versa? 2 lines of lyrics? etc.
etc.