Re: copyright

[zodiac <zodiac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tim writes:

>I am afraid I disagree with you totally.  I know I speak for around 99.9% of
>all writers.  We are workers like anyone else, except we produce an
>intellectual product.  We need to be paid for our labor.   Copyright is just
>about all we have to see that this happens.

Good gosh! 99.9! That is some united force of writers! Another
cyberfirst! :-)

I make my living from writing. And I can say, without reservation:
Copyright hasn't added one wee penny to my pocket. I am paid for my
_current_ work. Copyright has absolutely nothing to do with putting bread
on the table. It merely protects me from having a "blockbuster" (see
previous post for definition) used by someone else.

So perhaps you aren't talking about "all" writers... or am I just missing
the copyright gravy train?

>I denigrate copyright is the same as defending the right of an enployer not
>to pay his/her's employees.

Errr... I'm not sure what you mean here. But copyright has nothing to do
with paying employees, it has to do with that labor AFTER employees
are paid.

>Of course, it would be an non-question if we lived in a society in which we
>received automatically everything we need and in return we worked as we are
>so motivated.  But that is not where it is presently at.  In this sense
>copyright, for writers, is a class struggle kind of issue.

Very true. And I made this point, though probably not very clearly. It is
the traditional conflict for those who work: we fight to defend our
interests, thereby defending the system, becoming further entrenched in it.
Intellectual property is completely "anti-communist" in every respect... yet
workers are forced to defend this capitalist form. But what other options
have they in a capitalist system?

Like you, I defend the writer herself. I work with hundreds every year. My
specifically anti-copyright comments are on a larger scale...

>Will the net destroy us?

No. But it will destroy copyright as we know it...

> If this were to happen the conglomerates would
>survive but creative people would not.  Will it happen?  No, it will not.  We
>will take what legal action is necessary to defend our intellectual property
>rights , which is to say, the products of our labor.

I doubt you will be able to "stop it" because it is a function of the means
of production of intellectual "goods".

No one is talking about "striking down" copyright, but rather that it
will become inconsequential, demanding we rethink "intellectual property"
relations. What we do have to beware are the thought cops/thugs...

My favorite quote from talking with Barlow was about the music industry
overlords, and I think it applies to the various backwards writers' unions
I've had pleasure to watch:

    "They are dragging their thrones down to the sea and commanding the
    tide not to come in."


Ken.


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------