The entry cost of the housing market is a greater driver of rent than vacant rental properties. The laws even encourage property owners to leave a property empty than lower the rent.
The entry cost of the housing market is a greater driver of rent than vacant rental properties. The laws even encourage property owners to leave a property empty than lower the rent.
I think there’s room for improvement on copyright laws, but that’s a far cry from the outrageous claim that intellectual property isn’t a real thing.
In most if the modern world, copyright laws give automatic ownership of unique works of art. Legally IP is a real thing.
Landlords hording property reduces the supply to people who want to buy. This shortage reduces the supply:demand ratio, which drives prices higher. Higher house prices informs the price of rent which is controlled by the people creating the shortage.
People aren’t suggesting to abolish investment property, they are simply saying we should remove the abuse investment.
So if an artist creates a piece of intellectual property, do you not think they should have control over how it’s used? Including who can make profit off of it?
Sorry, I’m not going to read all that, but it seems like you’re upset about the shitty deals made by record labels and other large corporations, not intellectual property rights.
What do you think drives the price of rentals? Not being able to afford to buy keeps people stuck in rental living where they can be price gouged. If the price of houses drops due to an oversupply, more renters will buy, which reduces demand for rentals, which will drive down the price of rent making it more affordable to rent.
If you take away the ability to own and control your intellectual property, then you won’t be empowered.
Licensing art allows creators to earn a living off of their hard work.
If you save the cheerleader then the creepy serial killer will join the team.
I don’t think YouTube really compares to Netflix
I reckon it’s more like the iPod touch. It’s applying a new idea in an area that is a mismatch for it’s potential. Eventually the best use for the emerging tech will become apparent and the current form will fall away
Hey, you’re just salty that you didn’t get in on the ground floor when Stargate was being exclusively streamed in a dedicated Stargate streaming service
If you get rid of licensing you get rid of the content
Nah, my company doesn’t allow torrenting movies so a corporate VPN is useless
A lot of people are expressing the sentiment that the government should have exposed and punished them, but quietly kicking out spies is par for the course. When this hits the media it’s generally a bad thing.
Everyone spies on everyone. Everyone knows they are getting spied on. You have to be careful how you respond because you don’t want to escalate. You make it known to the other government that they have been caught and you gently move them on as a show of good will. When your spies are caught abroad breaking laws you want them to do the same for you. Now that this has gone public, India lose face, which could cause future tension. Also, sometimes finding spies on home soil can be useful if you let them think they haven’t been caught.
The average citizen thinks you can use playground rules here, but espionage is all about being subtle.
That’s normal and expected. What’s sad is that there are countries with governments who don’t tell companies not to be shitty.
If copyright was abolished overnight, then the corporations with enough money would control everything. The chance for an individual creator to create and control their unique art would disappear. Works of art and entertainment would forever be controlled by giant corporations.
I’m not sure how official “copyleft” is, but it reads like the creative commons licence which which falls under copyright.
So yes, one of the advantages, and explicit purposes, of copyright is that you get to maintain control of how your intellectual property is used.
The people who argue against copyright need to understand that one of the functions of copyright is to prevent companies with deep pockets from taking the profits you deserve for your hard work.
You are thinking about IP with tunnel vision. You just want to gain entertainment for free. There’s more than that to IP laws. How would you like it if you made art that was then used in a manner that you philosophically disagree with. For example, Meghan Trainor had a song that was used against her will in a political campaign against same sex marriage, she was able to cease and desist this use because of IP laws.