Showing posts with label the battle for 2019. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the battle for 2019. Show all posts

Third time's the 'Jam.





You guys know I Love Myself some public domain stuff. especially when there's a chance for me to show off. what happened in 2014  A Games  Jam, hosted by Gritfish. the theme of which was public domain characters and stories. there was only a problem : by the time I found out about it it was already over.

I tried to create my own later that year. Nobody participated. next year there was another public domain Jam, which I was ready to participate in but alas I was unable to.


Now that I realize that this is a yearly event I have been able to anticipate that the next one will take place in less than a week. The third annual public domain game Jam House being announced and I'm letting you  know my intention to participate in it .

 I also would like to announce that whatever my entry  will be my characters and stories will come from public domain comics. This subject is so obscure that not even the Jam's host, whose mission is to try to make people aware that there are works in the public domain beyond zombies, is not aware of them. I will also like to say this so that if you are considering to enter please do so. I know I have a bug up my butt about public domain and copyright and stuff like that but it's important. And I guess there are the prizes too. I'd do it for free, but if they're handing out 1000 $ like last year, that's cool. Daddy litterally needs himself some new shoes.

WTFU Watch: Cyber Zombie Apocalypse

Fear the  Walking Copyright Reformists.


It looks like WTFU is  going places. Specifically to discuss copyright and what changes it needs to the copyright office itself. For the first time in basically 40 years, it looks like there are other voices in the copyright discussion table besides the copyright maximalists and entertainment industry lobbyists that  haven't made copyright last forever because they can't.

So obviously you expect some backlash. The backlash is that we're cheating, thieving cyber terrorist zombies.

According to an article on the Huffington Post, the last minute submission of thousands of requests to the copyright office to amend the DMCA cannot be described as anything but cyberterrorism.  After all, the amount of petitions going on at once DID crash the servers.  Probably because of how many people suddenly entered because we did not know about this until literally that day.

"There’s really no other way to describe these kind of actions than coordinated cyber bullying campaigns built on distorted information to incite an angry online mob. A mob that mobilizes and then disappears quickly back into the shadows." said William Buckley Jr, like a jackass.

Now, this is a romantic image. Mobs going in there and dissapearing , Fuente Ovejuna Style, so no individual can be identified.

But there are no secret mobs. This mob is quite public. It is what the entertainment industry has always really been afraid of: people, willingly becoming involved with a copyright that is supposed to, by design, supposed to benefit said people. Loss of control thrives fear.

 "Section 512 is where the battle line is being drawn between online businesses that use a loophole in the law to reap enormous profits from using copyrighted material without permission and the copyright holders who have seen their careers crater and their earnings evaporate. It is nothing less than a life and death struggle for the future of art in America. A battle whose outcome is yet undecided."

Oh, yeah? Which copyright holders have seen their careers crater and their earnings evaporate? Who are you talking about? Do you have any examples?

You see, for big entertainment it's important to draw that starving artist card every time their humongous earnings and complete control over all elements of production and distribution are threatened. Because if they said  that the same guys who don't want to pay their performing artists  for using their music in ads, and the same ones who tell David Prowse that Return of the Jedi didn't make any money so they can't pay him any, are the ones advocating for copyright laws with even more teeth, then well, that's not as appealing as saying "poor Jim Artist,  how's he supposed to make a living if he can't take down copies of his work forever and then nuke the site from orbit? {8(..."
It's like looking at this guy and saying he needs bodyguards
This is a fight for FAIR USE.  And as much as they'll tell you they  love themselves some fair use, the actual real life says other wise.

Lives ARE on the balance. That much is true. Freedom of Speech is being trampled. Up and coming businesses, the same ones copyright was supposed to protect, are being put in danger. Nobody loses their job because I uploaded an anime music video of Batman v Supermen, but whenever The Nostalgia Critic can't upload a video because there's no godamn  nuance in the system, it means Tamara Chambers, Malcolm Ray and Jim Jarosz might have to go hungry that day.


Fittingly, then, second article described the entire situation as a "Zombie Apocalypse".  You see, Keith Kupferschmi, of the Copyright Alliance, says that even though ove 900000 people expressed that, "yeah, the DMCA is broken", and that's certainly valuable insight..."These 90,000 comments are all identical submissions generated merely by clicking on the “I’m in” button at takedownabuse.org"

First of all, no it wasn't. It certainly had a prewritten  post and function, but individual people could edit it to their heart's content. Secondly, it was almost 100,000 individual responses FROM people. That they weren't all original, "from the heart" responses is unimportant, because these thousands of people agreed that the DMCA is broken.That's what the Copyright office was asking, and that's what we answered.

 It's funny, though, that the  article  does it's preface by drawing heavilly from The Walking Dead.

"My family knows not to bother me from 9 to 10 pm every Sunday night. That’s my The Walking Dead time.  While the show is about zombies and what happens after the zombie apocalypse, those who watch the show know the real danger to our protagonists, Rick, Michonne, Daryl and the rest of the crew, is not the zombies all all.  The real threats come from the living -- terrifying villains like the Governor, Gareth and now the charismatic Negan."

Funny. The Walking Dead only exists because the copyright on "Night of the Living Dead" fell through, thus allowing TV stations to run it for cheap, thus  lots of people seeing it and being inspired by it, thus creating the Zombie Horror genre that allowed Robert Kirkman to create a comic about it without having to pay George Romero for it. In turn this allowed the TV show to exist.


That a copyright maximalist, the kind that would unironically argue the "Forever less One Day"  mentality that caused 2 retroactive extensions to copyright and the complete lack of any works entering the public domain until 2019, to use The Walking Dead to argue FOR the continual enlenghtening, engirthening, and enwidening of copyright is perhaps delicious irony.

One more thing.


"If there are problems with the DMCA the best way to understand what those problems are, and to attempt to address them, is for those with concerns to voice them in detail and not file yet another zombie comment.  As we’ve learned from The Walking Dead, those zombies are rather easily disposed of."


A single zombie is no threat, just like a single Lawrence Lessig was no threat to the selfrighteous Sonny Bono act of 1998. But that's the thing about zombies. There rarely is just one of them. And their infectious. They don't just destroy those that oppose them. They make them join their ranks.


Things aren't ever going to go back to the way they were. You won't just be able to launch a sneak law attack and get away with screwing everyone  anymore.  You can't just tell everyone you know what's best for them. You're not the only game in town.

The infection is only begun.






Not an April Fools Joke: Fight against the DMCA #WTFU


To be fair, I wanted the "togeeeeether!" song...
Because we're all in this together

So apparently the copyright office has opened a 24 hour window to ask people what they thought about the DMCA.  That was yesterday.

 You know I'm very passionate about copyright issues and I'm   in favor of Where's the Fair Use. And the DMCA is bad, and a great part of the reason why  sites on Youtube have to be so hard on Copyright, because basically this law makes Youtube as guilty of copyright infringement as the uploader of full episodes of a show.


So, what, I have a blog that at least some folks watch, and besides participating on my own, I also invite you to.


Please,watch Doug Walker's video about the subject, and tell these bastards Best Geek Ever sent you.

#WTFU Watch: In the defense of Youtube





There is a saying in my country that goes: The rope always snaps at it's thinnest. It is meant to say that, those that are least empowered are always the most likely to feel the negative effects in any situation. I'll come back to that.

Doug "Nostalgia Critic" Walker has apparently set the online world on fire with his simple request that Youtube handle reinvent the system by which it judges copyrighted content  and fair use, which is to say it doesn't, and it's rife with abuse and completely lacking a human component.

And I agree with it. All of it. Youtube needs to reform it's system. They've got the money for it. But let's be fair to Youtube.

Copyright laws as they are, thanks to the Digital Millenium  Copyright Act, make Youtube responsible for it's user submitted content. It was designed to prod hosting websites to police copyrighted content on their sites, or face steep, steep fines.


Copyright is supposed to produce innovation, but lot's of elements of  current copyright are doing the opposite, trampling the innovations and formats of the internet to serve old models and those with a stake on them. That's not just ME saying that.

The American government commissioned a Task Force to investigate how to make copyright do more what it's supposed to. It took them 3 years and millions of dollars to make a series of recommendations that I could have told you for the meager ad revenue it would bring me: that steep fines encourage copyright trolling and chill innovation. That Remix culture need to be let breath.

However, that's not the recommendations they are planning to act on. They know their copyright system is broken, and the only way to fix it is FORCE EVERY NATION ON THE EARTH TO ADOPT THE SAME BROKEN SYSTEM. So we can all be even in our wrongness.

Youtube needs to revise the ways it handles  copyrighted material on it's site, yes. I completely agree with that. For one, the algorithm that detects the content should  take into consideration amount, and there should be penalties for fake and malicious claims, and Youtube should request that only the owner of the content, verified, can make a claim. It should definitively not be telling me a public domain movie belongs to someone else. But it is not a coincidence that Youtube's system is broken, when they are also under a very broken copyright law system.

I mean, let's face it, Youtube isn't the only  website with user submitted content out there. Practically all social networks work like that, and while it is entirely possible someone could upload illegal content, or just content they wouldn't have on their site at all, you don't see THEM going to this level.

Somebody once flagged me for pornography on Facebook. It was a drawing of Lady Deathstrike fighting Tiffany Lords.

It got looked at pretty fast, it was determined it was NOT pornography, and we all moved on.  Is it any harder for YT? I would think the user base of Facebook is even larger (1.19 billion) and much more likely to put unwanted content than in Youtube (1 billion ), were many users aren't even uploading anything, just watching.  But they don't sweat it. You don't see takedowns like in Youtube. There's people in there.



I'm not trying to let Youtube off the hook. But this bigger than  Doug Walker not getting payed, or me not being able to show my stupid video in Germany. This is bigger than that. This is the very reason we need to reform our copyright system in a way that makes sense for everyone in the now, not just  big entertainment companies in the mid 70's. I made Limited Times , this very blog, precisely to address this kind of issue and to bring it to light.

The rope always does break at the thinnest. Big Entertainment wants laws that make other people (I.E. Government and  Web Hosting sites)carry out a defense of IT'S copyrighted work, when that's clearly their own responsibility. Youtube isn't gonna take the exaggerated cost of carrying out a copyright defense of Doug Walker's video's on court. Rope's gotta break somewhere.

So yes, I support #WTFU . But I also support #Copyrightreform, which is something we desperately need, and we've needed for a long time. It's something I've been championing on a blog for a while.


I look forward to how this turns out. But regardless, remember that this didn't start now. This didn't start when Google bought Youtube. This is the results of years of wrongheaded  mishandling of the very idea of copyright. It needs to be dealt with at it's core, as a nation.





Public Domain '16 Damage Report includes Supergirl, Ironman, Groot.

Happy Public Domain Day! I join Duke University in celebrating all the works that our current copyright has stolen out of the public domain.
But no offense, Dukey, nobody  gets angry they can't remake Gone with the Wind and shit. I don't know about you, but they didn't show that on TV when I was growing up. People need to know which pop culture artifacts of the today would have been everyone's soon.

This first year's list includes some of the more popular sidekicks and villains in the world, including some who are just now getting on TV and Movies!

I'm dividing this list into two parts.

After the first extension:



Copyright has been lengthened  for 40 years. First they gave it 20 in the 70s, then 20 more the 90s. The following are what would have happened if the second extension had not come to pass.

Lex Luthor


Luthor and Superman go together like nail and flesh.  While there's not a lot about him that's trademarkable (bald, mad scientist, villain) it'd be pretty neat to just up and use him without going all Superman 3 on him.

Cat Woman

Cat puns ahoy! While we're not short on cat themed femme fatales, this would be a total boon on those presumably working on Batman since last year.Catwoman is one of those characters who's just a part of modern Batman. She won't be alone, though since we'd also see...

The Joker


Batman's worst enemy for 75 years straight, the Joker would be a welcome addition to ANY  heroes universe. Or anything, really. Carebears vs Joker? Why nawt?

Green Lantern


 

While not covering the current space cop Green Lanterns, I doubt the opportunity to reinvent Alan Scott, who fought crime with a literal Green Lantern, would be considered a great loss.

Hugo Strange
 

Batman is all  the rage on this list, huh? Hugo Strange is a psychologist, but is also somewhat of a supervillain that wants to kill Batman or maybe fuck him, I don't know.

Flash
 
The original Flash, Jay Garick, could be racing with Quicksilver today.

Hawkman

 

Okay, I don't really know who loves Hawkman. He's just all...well you could use him, anyway.



Robin



Robin is..we all know about Robin. You could go to remote islands  with no electricity and find people who know about Robin. What I'm saying is, it's a bit bullshit that he's not public domain.



But hold on! When those works were created, copyright lasted 56 years.   The above all should have lapsed years ago, and we should be already be getting works from 1959, according to those Commie Pinkos THE FOUNDING FATHERS.

So what stuff from 1959 would lapse today?

Hal Jordan Green Lantern
Hey, unlike the other list, this one includes most of the core elements of today's GL. Carrol Ferris. Guardians.

Supergirl

In this timeline, Superman has lapsed years ago. But until this year, Supergirl remains  locked up.

Gorilla Grodd
With our current fascination with hig concepts, I imagine the villainous, talkig gorilla would be a welcome addition.

Batmite
 

Okay, this one's a bit stupid. Okay, a lot stupid. Batmite is a magic being from another dimension that was around during Batman's "stupid as fuck" phase. Hey, Batman's public domain now, you can do whatever you want with him.

Bizarro
Bizarro am not....Bizarro is one of Superman's most celebrated characters. An endearingly backward version of Superman, Bizarro's just one of those characters you can always find an angle to.


Ironman


Ironman! The guy from the movies! We're not quite talking gold and red demon in a bottle Iron Man yet.

Groot
Groot wasn't always Groot. Well not the Groot he is today. He was once a megalomaniacal tree man from space. I'm guessing that could have it's own uses.


Black Widow
Okay,like Luthor, there's not a lot that Natasha Romanov  has that's  visually important. But  hey,  she's bound to have fans.

Mr Freeze
If you liked chilling with the villains, Mr Freeze would be right up your street. While his mega tragic backstory would remain offlimits for 3 decades more, you'd need fear no lawsuis for including the bubbleheaded icemaster.




I want to make it perfectly clear that when these works were copyrighted, the makers and owners of these characters knew full well that their work was supposed to lapse in 56 years, okay? It was supposed to be an incentive for them to create, and it worked, and now it's not fair to back down and say WE'RE wrong for wanting them to uphold their part of the deal. There's no serious reason why making a Supergirl movie should be  a crime at this point. But it IS.



 That's just my opinion, though. What do you think?






What are you guys watching?