Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Good (Score 1) 302

As if there's a significantly lucrative market for silent films these days.

Freaking capitalists.... Because money is the only reason to do anything. You are like the religious people who believe that morality would not exist without god except that it's "incentive would not exist without monetary gain".

What really happens is this: Whom ever owns the copyright sits on those films and does nothing because there is no monetary incentive. The film buff(s) who would donate their time to restore and archive the work are sued if when they try.

Comment: Re:They should be doing the opposite (Score 3, Insightful) 309

Most everything is derivative. It's not possible to be uninfluenced by copyrighted material.

Also, how is it remotely fair that the IP owners can perpetually reap income from work that was performed even 10 years ago let alone 70? Most of us get paid once for the work we do. Are the IP owners (not necessarily even the creators...) so much more deserving than the rest of us? Fuck everything about this system. IP does not exist. It's a figment of our collective imagination. I'm all for fair play but perpetual IP protection is not it.

Comment: Re:"Drama of mental illness" (Score 4, Informative) 353

It's a UK article and the author seems to have found a source:
"Official figures confirm the picture she paints, with emergency admissions to child psychiatric wards doubling in four years, and those young adults hospitalised for self-harm up by 70 per cent in a decade."

Comment: Everything is derivative. (Score 5, Informative) 386

More offensive to me than a jury's decision that Blurred Lines violated copyright law is that Marvin Gaye's children (or anyone, for that matter) feel entitled to income from a dead man's 40+ year old music. To hell with perpetual and transferable intellectual property rights.

No directory.