On Thursday, January 10, 2002, at 06:09 AM, G.H. Hovagimyan wrote:
"How can you copyright something that has no fixed form?"
Quite easily, actually. just because a narrative is non-linear or random doesn't change the fact that someone created that narrative, and retains rights under current copyright law. Examples: role-playing games, video games, those "choose-your-own-adventure" books from childhood, writing anthologies, CDs, magazines...all of which are non-linear (or potentially non-linear) and the sequence is determined by the user. All of which are copyrightable, because a content creator mulled over the components, created the elements, thought through the potential sequencing, provided mechanisms to negotiate through the content, and worked to get the content distributed. It's a far cry from a spontaneously self-creating work that has no fixed form and no source of origination.
But I think there's another point of confusion here. Frankly, I still don't understand why the content creators and the megacorporations are all getting lumped together on this. I could care less about whether or not Britney Spears and her record label are shortchanged 5% on sales because of piracy. What worries me are the small record labels, the independent authors, the unsigned bands, the young artists who need compensation in the form of patronage, support, or outright sales.
so I ask again: if content producers effectively lose the right to compensation from and distribution of their works because of advances in technology, what do you think that's going to do to the quality and availability of content?