What to replace Copyright with?
3Alternative title: My Proposal for Replacing Copyright
In this speech I discuss what I would replace copyright with. I would not change existing copyright law, but instead replace it entirely with something new of my own. There are 3 categories of distinct separate laws that I would replace copyright with concerning the areas of;
1. Artistic things, fiction, stories and culture.
2. Statements of opinion and statments of viewpoints. And also all political speeches and recordings and such, also journalism and reporting things and events that take place in the world. Factual reality based works.
3. The functional works, works that are meant to do a practical job whether physical or a digital. This category includes most notably computer software as an example.
In this speech I give an overview of what this kind of a legal system would look like.
You'll notice in the speech each category permits private use for any purpose and sharing privately amongst "friends", I believe sharing is good and should be encouraged, this is one key difference between the current copyright law and the system I would replace it with.
Do realize, my proposal is a replacement for copyright, it is not meant to serve the same purpose as what the current copyright exists for. The current copyright exists for hoarders to gain at the expence of the people, whereas my system benefits the people and is designed with the people in mind first and foremost. I believe the world would be a better place if my brand of what some call "intellectual property" was in effect, altough the use of that term is discouraged, I do not yet have a name for my system.
Btw, since I mentioned "intellectual property" now here in this description this reminds me that I did not at all touch on patents, that's not too bad because this speech was specifically about copyright, so all is well, but since it's somewhat related under that misleading term "intellectual property" I will say this:
get rid of patents. Patents are bad also just like copyright.
————
I forgot to mention, the author of an art should have to specifically request an exclusive monetary right for a work from the state, it should not be granted by default. If the state deems the artwork original enough, then the author will be given a limited amount of time to profit exclusively from the work.
For the politics and statements of opinion, they apply by default and do not need to be requested from the state. But the author give up the restriction on derivative works if they so wish, therefore allowing people to make derivatives. This could be done by granting a "derivative license" to anyone who has a copy of the political statement. Also another thing I forgot to mention is that this exclusivity should also expire in time.
Then finally the third category of functional works will apply universally and eternally. Due to the lack of recognition of authors and specific software programs, just seeing everything as "just software". There is no author that could lose any exclusive rights to anything, it's just software, and the law applies to all distribution of all software.
————
Here is a good guideline for edge cases if you are having difficulty deciding whether it's one or the other:
if it's a conflict between artistic and political, then categorize it as artistic.
if it's a conflict between practical work and any of the 2 others, then it's a practical work
0:00 introduction
3:17 category 1 artistic works
15:00 category 2 statements of opinion, politics and viewpoints. And journalism-like things
25:45 differences between category 1 of art and category 2 of statements, and about edge cases
33:53 category 3 functional works
40:06 expailing software freedom. And comparing software as a tool to a physical tool.
45:57 why source code has to be available for software
49:08 the 4 freedoms of software explained
56:04 comparing category 3 to category 1. And talking more about edge cases
1:04:57 purpose of current copyright versus what a copyright-like law really should exist for. And some random stuff
1:12:42 more on the category 2, ownership of the ideas themselves versus the specific recording
1:16:35 edge case on sampling between category 2 and category 1
1:24:16 ending stuff