I already stated what my position was regarding reforming IP law several pages back, well before some posters started calling ME a slaver, thief and socialist.
Basically find a happy medium where the author retains the rights (can reclaim them from a corporation without legal recourse) is protected from corporations just taking his shit and running with it and maybe can inherit to the sons.
Probably less than forever and certainly more than 2 years as someone proposed (Estar, Pat or Oddend I think). You usually retire at 65, lets say then 50 years and if you die then it's inherited by your heirs. This puts you at 70 if you published at 20 and in your grave if you published at 40-50 with your heirs getting the remainder.
But this caused a cascade of caustic acid to be droped on me. I'm not sure I want to be in the same camp as THOSE people.
So I might seriously be on the forever camp now. Especially if that would cause the "It's just an idea man!" people to loose their shit.
You were the one who started calling everyone communists and socialists and thieves. And then I pointed out that one the major planks in your argument (the right to be paid based on the effort you put into it) was straight from Karl Marx.
Also, the 2 years was a joke. I was a response to you saying you wanted the term of copyright protections extended to forever. I also said it once. You've said forever probably a dozen times.
Another person who can dish it out, but can't take it. Rules for thee, but not for me. Where have we seen that before?
Lets see Pat: Where exactly do I say that? Quote me, none of that "creative quoting technique"
I've said many times that part of the investment of a creative product IS work/effort/labor and also that you don't owe me a cent for that. Unless you want to use what I made, then you have to pay the price I deem correct for my product.
Do you seriously think a mason doesn't include his labor as part of the price for building a house? Or the plumber for fixing your drains? Are they socialists too?
You keep conflating gimnasium with magnesium.
To be a socialist argument I would need to be working for say Baizuo and demanding the owners get zero because of my labor.
But since I'm the owner I can't do that... So tell me again how your car mechanic, plumber, carpenter are socialists because they include their labor as part of the price you pay?
And if they're not then how come I am for doing the same?
Or you (once again) are talking out of your ass?
Square that circle child.
Then come back with your "It's just an idea man!" non-argument.
What creative quoting techniques? You're making very slimy insinuation, and you need to back that up. Where have I ever done anything except quote the exact statement I'm addressing?
Since you're admitting that you're unfamiliar with basic economics with those questions, I'll give you a quick primer. The resources, including time and effort, used to produce something is part of the economic calculation used by entrepreneurs and other business types. That's also known as basic accounting. They use market-generated prices to run the numbers, and then make projections, which they use to inform their decisions as they invest in new lines of production. Sometimes this works, sometimes this doesn't. It's what separates the failed businesses from the successful ones.
Companies thrive or die based on whether they guess or fail to guess what the market wants, but the inputs have nothing to do with the prices people are willing to pay. Your labor does not make something more valuable or less valuable. What determines value is the subjective determinations of other people in the market, who make individual decisions about how to allocate their own resources, including money. Unless there is price fixing, which can be direct or the result of a monopoly, companies can't force people to pay the price they "deem correct". See Venezuela or Soviet Russia for how that turns out.
This isn't controversial. The only major or minor school of economics that disagrees is the Marxists. If you want to educate yourself on intro economics, I recommend Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson or Sowell's Basic Economics as a starting place. For understanding the basics of how socialism fails as a system, try Von Mises' Socialism.
What the hell is "gimnasium with magnesium".
And where have I said "It's just an idea man!"? Quote me, none of that "creative quoting technique", or you're talking out of your ass, child.
(Honestly if you just drop all the dismissive phrasing, I will too. But until then, I'm going to keep throwing it back at you.)
You really think I don't know how prices are calculated?
In market X a plumber can charge Y for it's time plus materials while in market P a plumber can charge Y+10% for it's time plus materials.
When the plumber is giving you an estimate, he is including his time/work into the calculation.
Now again, when I say my time/work matters into the price of my game you say it's marxism.
Now please do quote where I say this "(the right to be paid based on the effort you put into it)". Can you? I bet you can't.
You're too busy trying to win the argument to do the bare minimum to try and understand what I'm saying even if we do disagree.
Once again: YOU don't have the right to PROFIT from my work without a voluntary exchange of money between us.
That doesn't mean you owe me shit, but it also doesn't mean you can just take my shit and profit from it without my say so & said voluntary exchange of money.
Plenty of people publish their shit and never make a dime, that's fine. Nobody has the obligation to give them UBI (something else one of you claimed I was in favor off). Their right to profit from their shit hasn't been infringed if nobody buys their shit.
It is infringed if someone takes their shit and profits from it without a contract and an exchange of money (unless the dumbass signed the rights away for free).
This I have explained in so many different ways, and yet YOU call this slavery, socialism and Estar claims I'm infringing on his rights to? I dunno, pirate my stuff?
So you're not on the "A finished game is an idea camp?"
Well if you don't think that way then my bad.
Now please provide that exact quote where I said that. "(the right to be paid based on the effort you put into it)". Can you? I bet you can't.
PROFIT =/= PAID Not in this case, again, to be a socialist thing it has to be directed against the owners of a company claiming they have no right to the profits because labor.
Since I'm the "owner of the company" (Put company in infinite quotes), I can hardly be making that argument, AND YOU SHOULD KNOW this.
What's more, you DO know that's not my argument because you also claimed I'm for slavery because I want people to give me money for my product. Which is another stupid claim since a voluntary exchange of money for goods/services CAN'T be slavery.
UNLESS you think my game should be available for free for anyone and they should also be able to print and sell it (or sell the PDF) without my signature in a contract...
So are my games a product or an idea?