Suing photo thief - for how much money?

Article I said:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
Notice how it's phrased: to promote useful arts and sciences, not to ensure you can make a buck. Copyright exists for the public good. The End. A temporarily commercial monopoly is merely the method by which that public good is obtained, but most artists of various types seem to think of it as a license to print money.
If you can think of a better method than a temporary commercial monopoly I'd like to hear it. Also, I think that artists who think their copyrights are a license to print money are definitely a minority.
 
If you can think of a better method than a temporary commercial monopoly I'd like to hear it.
How about a temporary one? ;) Copyright currently lasts longer than the artist, which is absurd and works completely against the purpose of copyright. It needs to go back to its original length of just a few years, not life plus infinity.
 
The first question a lawyer is going to ask you is if you registered the photo with the copyright office?

Moot point, if one is the true copyright holder they can still register the image with the copyright office at any time, even after an infringement is found.
 
If you can think of a better method than a temporary commercial monopoly I'd like to hear it.
How about a temporary one? ;) Copyright currently lasts longer than the artist, which is absurd...
Not totally. Consider the case of two individuals who are born on the same day, die on the same day and make the same amount of money during their lifetime. One is a stockbroker who spends his life accumulating stocks. The other is an artist who spends his life accumulating copyrights. When the broker dies his family has the income from his stocks. When the artist dies his family has the income from his art. If you are going to deny the artist's family the benefits of his life's work then in all fairness you shoud deny the broker's family the benefits of his work. I.e., if the artist's work is to become public domain upon his death then the brokers stocks should go the the public upon his death.
... and works completely against the purpose of copyright.
How?
It needs to go back to its original length of just a few years, not life plus infinity.
I'd settle for life plus a few years. Life plus infinity, which it effectively is now, is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
..... ;) Copyright currently lasts longer than the artist, which is absurd and works completely against the purpose of copyright. It needs to go back to its original length of just a few years, not life plus infinity.
US copyright is for the life of the author/creator +70 years, to protect the rights of the authors/creators heirs. www.copyright.gov

Canadian copyright is for life +50 years, last I checked.
 
Look waaaaaay back... back to the constitution, which sets out the purpose of copyright:

Article I said:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
Notice how it's phrased: to promote useful arts and sciences, not to ensure you can make a buck. Copyright exists for the public good. The End. A temporarily commercial monopoly is merely the method by which that public good is obtained, but most artists of various types seem to think of it as a license to print money.

In a capitalistic society, you promote the public good by ensuring profitability. I submit that the framers of our constitution were capitalists.
 
Look waaaaaay back... back to the constitution, which sets out the purpose of copyright:

Article I said:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
Notice how it's phrased: to promote useful arts and sciences, not to ensure you can make a buck. Copyright exists for the public good. The End. A temporarily commercial monopoly is merely the method by which that public good is obtained, but most artists of various types seem to think of it as a license to print money.

In a capitalistic society, you promote the public good by ensuring profitability. I submit that the framers of our constitution were capitalists.

Of course they were, and moreover that works of creativity benefit the author and creator, since that promotes ideas and more creativity.

skieur
 

Most reactions

Back
Top