Copyright Madness
This is just some entry to get something off my chest which has been bothering me for quite a while now, especially after I have seen what happened to my youtube account. <.<
Just from the title of this entry, one can assume what I am going to rant about now.
And no, it is not just because youtube banned more than half of my video ONLY because they contained scenes from the 5D's Anime in PICTURE-ONLY (Means, no voice, except my own when I tried to fandub the scenes)....
I will leave aside the irony that these fandub videos of mine were all banned by 4Kids, whom I will never see as the original owners of 5D's - if anything, this series belongs to the makers, not some american dub company who hasn't even created it.
It just bothers the heck out of me to see that my videos are banned by 4Kids only because I used SOME SCENES from the original because I felt like maybe giving some scene while I try to dub it with my own voice should be okay. Especially if it is only just excerpts, not an entire episode. Since when is it not allowed to use excerpts for something?
I totally understand when youtube bans AMVs because they fear that someone might just download and rip the music that is contained in them, so I totally have no problem with them banning my AMVs. But banning my FANDUB, that has MY VOICE? Since when does MY VOICE belong to someone other than me? o___o And banning them just because I used excerpts with some pictures that belong to someone else... my gosh, I thought that using excerpts it okay, but apparently, I was f*cking wrong. >__<
So yes, this was the event that led me to think about all this copyright-madness that seems to be going on - I just knew something was fishy when Animexx.de banned the selling of ANY FORM OF FANART, BE IT PICTURES, DOUJINSHI, AND EVEN PLUSHIES as long as they contain characters of Anime Series;
----> http://animexx.onlinewelten.com/wiki/index.php/Fanartregeln
And with this, I, who was making plushies of whatever my customer desired with my own f*cking hands, has now not a chance to make some advertisement for selling her own products. Who cares if the plushies I make happen to be characters of "copyrighted series" which often don't even have any merchandise whatsoever yet because these tend to be minor characters (and thus, I am not actually making a "bootleg" or fake of anything)! For one thing, there are so many characters that look alike that "copyrighted characters" make me laugh out loud and for a second thing: I made these darn plushies all by myself with my bare hands, so I should be allowed to sell them, right?
Apparently not, if it goes by the authorities.
If we think like this even more, I wonder until when the time comes when it won't be allowed to post fanarts just because they contain "copyrighted material". If we take this madness too far, it won't take long until everything that I and many other people like to make will be totally forbidden. For one instance no one would then not be allowed to post any comics or any picture, simply because they have a character of the YuGiOh GX or YuGiOh 5D's series instead of having someone "original". But how to you define "original" nowadays, when you clearly see that anime characters look more and more alike to themselves? Just take "Kallen Stadtfeld" from Code Geass and compare to "Aki Izayoi" of YuGiOh 5D's and look for yourselves what I mean by that.
I wonder how long it will take until it is forbidden to sing a song on the streets because it is "copyrighted". How long will it take until it is a crime to use a "copyrighted" program for making your own works, like using Photoshop for pictures, or Microsoft word for your own writings? Does whatever you do with these programs then belong to the ones who made the program by default or what? <.<
Here are some other coypright-madness examples I have found over the internet:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/04/copyright_madness.html
http://wrecking.org/cbd/2006/04/26/scary-copyright-madness/
http://onthecommons.org/copyright-madness-continues%E2%80%A6 --> This case here is especially interesting, in which one man tries to ruin the fun of dancing for everyone else.
rt.com/usa/news/copyright-madness-1-million-for-7-songs/
www.lastfm.de/group/eMusic+Subscribers/forum/12142/_/476879
www.againstmonopoly.org/index.php
It just makes me wonder...
What is intellectual property anyways? Why is it so damn "wrong" if you like something, some idea, and make it a part of your "own world" inside your head? Ideas that are copyrighted can come up to someone's mind and he/she may think it is his own original idea until this person finds out that the idea he/she thought was his/hers is in fact not because someone thought of it before! Should this person then just abandon this idea? Look for something new? Of course, this can lead to finding an own unique idea and maybe pushing mankind a bit more forward (like for example, if someone has an idea for a new rocket-type for space or something along these lines); in this sense, maybe copyright is a good idea, since it can inspire people to try and find their own way and maybe improve an already existing work.
But the second in which copyright issues are used to force other people to abandon their ideas; in which people are imprisoned because they wanted to "share" something with others, or used a tiny excerpt of a work or someone else to propose some alternative use or make a parody of it.... something is going horribily wrong then.
I know it is all about money and such, that people fear that they won't be able to get any money any more; the big labels fear their losses in their shares, as do the artists of their work. This is of course understandable, but there must be a way so that they can still earn their living, and other people can still share their opinions of the work provided by the artists; the law of fair use deems me to be pretty okay in that.
fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/
What just blows my mind is when some people try to "copyright" things that already have become part of the society, like copyrighting a dance or a song used by everyone for years and generations.
Some ideas just tend to go viral, so should the one who started this idea sue everyone else who likes this idea and has it as a part of their mindset by now after generations?
Should nobody be allowed to play Mozart or sell CDs with classic music because this work was originally done by Mozart and thus he has the copyright of it?
If two people have the same new idea or concept at the same time and both decide to patent it, who of them gets the coypright? Who should get it?
I just don't like the sort of control that is slowly but sure enacted upon us under the "blanket of copyright". If it is suddenly forbidden to voice your own opinion on something by quoting an excerpt of a existing work, then how do you want to keep "free opinion" and the right to voice it? Should the publisher of a book have the right to outright censor you for your opinion under the excuse that you used an excerpt of the book to illustrate why it was bad? Should you be an accused terrorist and thief under the excuse of you protesting using an excerpt of something copyrighted and put into prison for that?
I always found all these advertisements along the lines of "if you copy that, you are a thief and WILL go into prison" rather scary, as these kind of advertisement actually opened up the dangerous path that it is righteous what the authorities do - using copyright as an excuse to imprison the undesired - and we are being trained to accept that by watching this advertisement over and over again.
One warning ahead: This is exactly what is coming at us. I would advise you to read all about the ACTA, a governing body outside of any government which will use "copyright infringement" as the one reason to put you, your family and your beloved into prison.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement
www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/draft_projet.aspx
So, say bye-bye to filesharing, and bye-bye to being free.
Because if everyone downloads something from the internet (and let's be honest, everyone nowadays does), and this ACTA law comes to pass, everyone will be deemed a criminal and could easily be disposed of.
And this is the ultimate where copyright-madness will lead us to if we are not careful... protecting an idea because you need it to get a living is okay, but using it as an excuse to put people into prison.... eh, I don't know... something is fishy there...
Just from the title of this entry, one can assume what I am going to rant about now.
And no, it is not just because youtube banned more than half of my video ONLY because they contained scenes from the 5D's Anime in PICTURE-ONLY (Means, no voice, except my own when I tried to fandub the scenes)....
I will leave aside the irony that these fandub videos of mine were all banned by 4Kids, whom I will never see as the original owners of 5D's - if anything, this series belongs to the makers, not some american dub company who hasn't even created it.
It just bothers the heck out of me to see that my videos are banned by 4Kids only because I used SOME SCENES from the original because I felt like maybe giving some scene while I try to dub it with my own voice should be okay. Especially if it is only just excerpts, not an entire episode. Since when is it not allowed to use excerpts for something?
I totally understand when youtube bans AMVs because they fear that someone might just download and rip the music that is contained in them, so I totally have no problem with them banning my AMVs. But banning my FANDUB, that has MY VOICE? Since when does MY VOICE belong to someone other than me? o___o And banning them just because I used excerpts with some pictures that belong to someone else... my gosh, I thought that using excerpts it okay, but apparently, I was f*cking wrong. >__<
So yes, this was the event that led me to think about all this copyright-madness that seems to be going on - I just knew something was fishy when Animexx.de banned the selling of ANY FORM OF FANART, BE IT PICTURES, DOUJINSHI, AND EVEN PLUSHIES as long as they contain characters of Anime Series;
----> http://animexx.onlinewelten.com/wiki/index.php/Fanartregeln
And with this, I, who was making plushies of whatever my customer desired with my own f*cking hands, has now not a chance to make some advertisement for selling her own products. Who cares if the plushies I make happen to be characters of "copyrighted series" which often don't even have any merchandise whatsoever yet because these tend to be minor characters (and thus, I am not actually making a "bootleg" or fake of anything)! For one thing, there are so many characters that look alike that "copyrighted characters" make me laugh out loud and for a second thing: I made these darn plushies all by myself with my bare hands, so I should be allowed to sell them, right?
Apparently not, if it goes by the authorities.
If we think like this even more, I wonder until when the time comes when it won't be allowed to post fanarts just because they contain "copyrighted material". If we take this madness too far, it won't take long until everything that I and many other people like to make will be totally forbidden. For one instance no one would then not be allowed to post any comics or any picture, simply because they have a character of the YuGiOh GX or YuGiOh 5D's series instead of having someone "original". But how to you define "original" nowadays, when you clearly see that anime characters look more and more alike to themselves? Just take "Kallen Stadtfeld" from Code Geass and compare to "Aki Izayoi" of YuGiOh 5D's and look for yourselves what I mean by that.
I wonder how long it will take until it is forbidden to sing a song on the streets because it is "copyrighted". How long will it take until it is a crime to use a "copyrighted" program for making your own works, like using Photoshop for pictures, or Microsoft word for your own writings? Does whatever you do with these programs then belong to the ones who made the program by default or what? <.<
Here are some other coypright-madness examples I have found over the internet:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/04/copyright_madness.html
http://wrecking.org/cbd/2006/04/26/scary-copyright-madness/
http://onthecommons.org/copyright-madness-continues%E2%80%A6 --> This case here is especially interesting, in which one man tries to ruin the fun of dancing for everyone else.
rt.com/usa/news/copyright-madness-1-million-for-7-songs/
www.lastfm.de/group/eMusic+Subscribers/forum/12142/_/476879
www.againstmonopoly.org/index.php
It just makes me wonder...
What is intellectual property anyways? Why is it so damn "wrong" if you like something, some idea, and make it a part of your "own world" inside your head? Ideas that are copyrighted can come up to someone's mind and he/she may think it is his own original idea until this person finds out that the idea he/she thought was his/hers is in fact not because someone thought of it before! Should this person then just abandon this idea? Look for something new? Of course, this can lead to finding an own unique idea and maybe pushing mankind a bit more forward (like for example, if someone has an idea for a new rocket-type for space or something along these lines); in this sense, maybe copyright is a good idea, since it can inspire people to try and find their own way and maybe improve an already existing work.
But the second in which copyright issues are used to force other people to abandon their ideas; in which people are imprisoned because they wanted to "share" something with others, or used a tiny excerpt of a work or someone else to propose some alternative use or make a parody of it.... something is going horribily wrong then.
I know it is all about money and such, that people fear that they won't be able to get any money any more; the big labels fear their losses in their shares, as do the artists of their work. This is of course understandable, but there must be a way so that they can still earn their living, and other people can still share their opinions of the work provided by the artists; the law of fair use deems me to be pretty okay in that.
fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/
What just blows my mind is when some people try to "copyright" things that already have become part of the society, like copyrighting a dance or a song used by everyone for years and generations.
Some ideas just tend to go viral, so should the one who started this idea sue everyone else who likes this idea and has it as a part of their mindset by now after generations?
Should nobody be allowed to play Mozart or sell CDs with classic music because this work was originally done by Mozart and thus he has the copyright of it?
If two people have the same new idea or concept at the same time and both decide to patent it, who of them gets the coypright? Who should get it?
I just don't like the sort of control that is slowly but sure enacted upon us under the "blanket of copyright". If it is suddenly forbidden to voice your own opinion on something by quoting an excerpt of a existing work, then how do you want to keep "free opinion" and the right to voice it? Should the publisher of a book have the right to outright censor you for your opinion under the excuse that you used an excerpt of the book to illustrate why it was bad? Should you be an accused terrorist and thief under the excuse of you protesting using an excerpt of something copyrighted and put into prison for that?
I always found all these advertisements along the lines of "if you copy that, you are a thief and WILL go into prison" rather scary, as these kind of advertisement actually opened up the dangerous path that it is righteous what the authorities do - using copyright as an excuse to imprison the undesired - and we are being trained to accept that by watching this advertisement over and over again.
One warning ahead: This is exactly what is coming at us. I would advise you to read all about the ACTA, a governing body outside of any government which will use "copyright infringement" as the one reason to put you, your family and your beloved into prison.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement
www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/draft_projet.aspx
So, say bye-bye to filesharing, and bye-bye to being free.
Because if everyone downloads something from the internet (and let's be honest, everyone nowadays does), and this ACTA law comes to pass, everyone will be deemed a criminal and could easily be disposed of.
And this is the ultimate where copyright-madness will lead us to if we are not careful... protecting an idea because you need it to get a living is okay, but using it as an excuse to put people into prison.... eh, I don't know... something is fishy there...