×
  • remind me tomorrow
  • remind me next week
  • never remind me
Subscribe to the ANN Newsletter • Wake up every Sunday to a curated list of ANN's most interesting posts of the week. read more

Forum - View topic
The Law of Anime Part I: Copyright and the Anime Fan


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Note: this is the discussion thread for this article

Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Chagen46



Joined: 27 Jun 2010
Posts: 4377
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:50 am Reply with quote
catbert wrote:
I encourage everybody to watch the video series Everything Is a Remix by Filmmaker Kirby Ferguson to shed light on how the creative process functions and that creative works cannot be created without borrowing and building on what has been done in the past.

Kirby Ferguson has spoken at TED, Google, Netflix, and many conferences.


I was on board with him but then he started his internet-anarchist "INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS A FRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUDD!!1!1!!1!" BS and I stopped caring.

I assume that man has never actually created anything in his whole life. If he did, he would've seen just intellectual property existed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Polycell



Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Posts: 4623
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:51 am Reply with quote
Chagen46 wrote:
I assume that man has never actually created anything in his whole life. If he did, he would've seen just intellectual property existed.
One has nothing to do with the other; Mozart certainly had no such protection and did pretty well without it. At any rate, Wheaton v. Peters held that once you publish a work you've no just right to control it - you have a legal right to do so, but only as a creature of statute which is of course subject to any change Congress sees fit, no matter how badly you feel slapped in the face.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chagen46



Joined: 27 Jun 2010
Posts: 4377
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:58 am Reply with quote
Of course--in all honesty, I would probably make most of any works I make available under Creative Commons, especially if I ever get into music--but I'm tired of the internet-anarchists who want everything for free and despise creators retaining rights over their works.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
samuelp
Industry Insider


Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 2231
Location: San Antonio, USA
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 1:12 pm Reply with quote
Polycell wrote:
Chagen46 wrote:
I assume that man has never actually created anything in his whole life. If he did, he would've seen just intellectual property existed.
One has nothing to do with the other; Mozart certainly had no such protection and did pretty well without it.

Mozart did pretty well?! Sure, for a time he did well, but in his later years he had to beg friends for money despite the growing success of his works and Operas.
Because he couldn't get any money for just a performance of his work, only for his own appearance or composition...
He's a perfect COUNTER example, if anything. He was forced to continue composing and performing right up until the end of his life to keep his finances in check.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cutiebunny



Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Posts: 1747
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 1:26 pm Reply with quote
I found this article amusing as I am currently reading Rob Reid's Year Zero which makes the asumption that mankind is the best species in existence when it comes to making music, and that, ever since Welcome Back Kotter aired, alien species have been engaging in music piracy since then. In short, two beings representing the rest of the alien species arrives on earth and, after selecting a lawyer because they thought he was a former Backstreet Boy, inform him that thanks to mankind's "Copyright Damages Improvement Act", they might owe a lot of money....and the only way to rectify that paying all that money, is to simply wipe us out.

It must be problematic for you that many 'pirating' sites host their material on servers located in countries that either do not care about piracy, or actively engage in it. I can only imagine the money that was involved in just legal fees alone in trying to get Mega to shut down, and I'd imagine that a smaller, but still far-too-much-for-most-anime-companies-to-pay, amount would be involved in shutting down other sites. It seems to me that, perhaps instead of fighting against the sharing of these forms of entertainment, that it would be best to allow people, worldwide, to view and share music within 24 hours of its release on a legitimate site where advertising revenue can be collected. Not that I'm trying to justify piracy, but, some money, even if it is pennies per visitor, is a lot better than no money.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
configspace



Joined: 16 Aug 2008
Posts: 3717
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 1:59 pm Reply with quote
samuelp wrote:
Polycell wrote:
Chagen46 wrote:
I assume that man has never actually created anything in his whole life. If he did, he would've seen just intellectual property existed.
One has nothing to do with the other; Mozart certainly had no such protection and did pretty well without it.

Mozart did pretty well?! Sure, for a time he did well, but in his later years he had to beg friends for money despite the growing success of his works and Operas.
Because he couldn't get any money for just a performance of his work, only for his own appearance or composition...
He's a perfect COUNTER example, if anything. He was forced to continue composing and performing right up until the end of his life to keep his finances in check.

His lack of riches as a result of market forces, despite being famous, and the need for him to continuously perform in an era without recordings seems to have nothing to do with supporting copyright.

In any case, copyright arose historically not as a mechanism to protect artists but to censor and regulate speech. But if one wants to have a philosophical discussion, I think we need to look more fundamental, universal negative-rights-based ethics, instead of purely utilitarian perspective which most focus on, and is a terrible basis for jurisprudence.

I mean logically, it doesn't even make sense: if you own something, why don't you own it forever? And how does one determine the boundaries when literally every creative work is derivative. How can you "own" a series of words, or a series of notes, when you don't own the component words or the component notes? From where does the right of ownership come from after combining an arbitrary amount of them? And who decides that threshold? Where do those deciders get their right from? And if you accept the premise of real ownership i.e. own forever like title to land, then that implies ownership in all intellectual parts no matter how small. So.. how can you communicate by words, by art (e.g. someone owns a "square" a "circle"), by music (e.g. someone owns the notes) if you don't first get permission? If we were to treat IP as real property, that means each word or all parts of language has an exclusive owner, since they were objectively other people's creation, and to use them without permission would be stealing. So if you truly did support the idea of IP, then you would not be talking or communicating at all, for that original ownership of words and/or string of words would not expire (much like real rights and real property ownership don't expire)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dtm42



Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 14084
Location: currently stalking my waifu
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:14 pm Reply with quote
^
It's not just a series of words or musical notes. These days corporations are trying to own numbers and make it illegal for others to use and propagate, because of course computer code and decryption keys can be written as numbers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number

And let's not forget patents on natural substances and living organisms:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent

Scary stuff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
Polycell



Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Posts: 4623
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:16 pm Reply with quote
samuelp wrote:
Mozart did pretty well?! Sure, for a time he did well, but in his later years he had to beg friends for money despite the growing success of his works and Operas.
Because he couldn't get any money for just a performance of his work, only for his own appearance or composition...
He's a perfect COUNTER example, if anything. He was forced to continue composing and performing right up until the end of his life to keep his finances in check.
"[R]ight up until the end of his life" is an odd thing to say about someone who died at thirty-five from an illness he got three months before(just when things were looking up, no less); we're not exactly talking about a frail old man desperately trying to finish each performance just to keep a small apartment and food on the table.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oneeyedjacks



Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 307
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 4:34 pm Reply with quote
Quote:
Code Geass: Akito the Exiled is a prime example of a derivative work; it does not star any of the original characters and merely occurs within the established universe and canon which is Code Geass. Thus a derivative work can be anything using the original characters or placed in an existing universe.


Not that it really matters, but Code Geass: Akito the Exiled does actually have two of the original characters from Code Geass. Both Suzaku and C.C. are confirmed to be involved in the second episode.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
la_contessa



Joined: 20 Apr 2007
Posts: 200
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:04 pm Reply with quote
dtm42 wrote:
Do Abridged series count as "fair use"? YouTube keeps on shutting them down for copyright violations but their makers insist that what they are doing is not illegal. What's the real story on them?


My personal opinion is that they are parody (fair use) under US copyright law. I think the case law is pretty clear on that. Now, the tricky thing is that Japanese copyright law does not contain a fair use provision. I don't know enough about the treaties to really comment on which country's laws would apply, though--I'm curious to see what the author's take on this is, because it's something I've just never studied.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
nightjuan



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 1473
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 8:09 pm Reply with quote
Oneeyedjacks wrote:

Not that it really matters, but Code Geass: Akito the Exiled does actually have two of the original characters from Code Geass. Both Suzaku and C.C. are confirmed to be involved in the second episode.


That's right...but this is still a derivative work, in the end, and the first episode focused exclusively on a set of new characters in a completely separate geographical location. This fact suggests that C.C. and Suzaku probably aren't going to stick around forever and may just play a secondary role (the first of them is likely to merely appear in a flashback, from the looks of things).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raja



Joined: 30 Jul 2003
Posts: 68
Location: Tottori
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 9:35 pm Reply with quote
Quote:
It is doubtful that any person who downloads torrents or digital copies of a show that they did not pay for believes that the act is legal.


I've found the opposite to be true. From internet message board debates to face-to-face arguments at local cons, a large fraction of consumers of fansubs believe it's perfectly legal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dtm42



Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 14084
Location: currently stalking my waifu
PostPosted: Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:45 pm Reply with quote
^
Surely that's just people trying to justify their actions by making things up and pretending that they haven't done anything illegal.

I download two-dozen episodes of Anime a week, all of them fansubs or CR-rips. I know what I'm doing is illegal, and I don't try and pretend otherwise. I do believe that what I'm doing doesn't hurt anyone, but that's a different area to legality.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
Chagen46



Joined: 27 Jun 2010
Posts: 4377
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:17 am Reply with quote
I have to say that even if fansubs are illegal, the fact is, you're not really affecting the owners of the show if you get them before the show is on disc, because the Japanese fans are also watching it for free. So, fansubs really aren't that bad.

Sure, they're illegal, but it's not really THAT bad to DL them. Especially when there's no legal way to watch them while they air (an example would be GJ-BU, which I may watch soon...only fansubs for that, so I'll have to go that route).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
crosswithyou



Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 2892
Location: California
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:48 am Reply with quote
Chagen46 wrote:
I have to say that even if fansubs are illegal, the fact is, you're not really affecting the owners of the show if you get them before the show is on disc, because the Japanese fans are also watching it for free. So, fansubs really aren't that bad.

But Japanese people are also watching the commercials (we won't get into the whole DVR issue, which is also something that American broadcasters can relate to) that help fund the "free" broadcast on TV.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 6 of 9

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group