Comment by syspec
7 hours ago
Surprised to see this level of discourse here on HN, reads like a reddit comment.
Copyright sucks, and Disney is bad etc, but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay?
I mean, creators should be allowed to exert control over how their assets and brand are used.
I've always found that defending laws that don't benefit people to be a stange attitude on a place called "hacker news".
Creative people should be able to create. Trademark/copyright laws, protecting assets for the great-grandchildren of who actually created the art, has never been a positive. The only people who benefit, are themselves not creative (or else they would create, instead of defending "rights" and "image").
How about protecting assets for the people who made the art in the first place, geeze.
And seriously wtf why shouldn't, like, Jack Kirby's grandkids get a share of the huge bounty of stuff he created for Marvel, but Elon Musk gets to inherit emerald mines from his dad?
You two are arguing over a timeframe.
Limit IP laws to 20 years.
Humans go from birth to being released into the public domain as an adult in roughly that time. Why are ideas somehow not in the Public Domain after a generation has grown up?
That way Jack Kirby gets to make his money. Jack's kids can live off his money. But Jack's ideas are free to use after doing their time.
IP has very low marginal cost, emeralds don’t.
>but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay? How is it not ok? What is the issue exactly? From what I can tell it's totally free, and has an indication it is a fan game on the bottom of the screen.
>Copyright sucks, and Disney is bad etc, but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay?
Because it's cool.
The number of conglomerates has, unsurprisingly, continued to shrink. It's long overdue for a rethink. Maybe if the US political system ever stabilizes, we might get to it in a hundred years. Until then Copyright sucks and Disney is bad.
> creators should be allowed to exert control over how their assets and brand are used
I hate to be glib, but no they shouldn't.
Creators should be allowed to create things and sell them. No one, whether the creator, or the company the creator worked for when they first created the thing, should be able to stop someone else from creating something.
> Creators should be allowed to create things and sell them.
I'm in two minds over this.
In a free for all, money wins. No small-money creator would get to profit from a truly great idea. Someone with more money simply copies it, builds it bigger/faster/better-logistics with more market budget.
At least let the creator sign over rights to their idea - even if the terms are unfair.
But once an object is in your hands. It should be free for you to do what you want with it for yourself. Deadmau5 legalities over his purrari should not be a thing.