Zon2020 doesn't it take an affirmative action to enter into a contract? I don't sign a paper or click ok (yet) when I play a movie. I highly doubt simply paying for, or playing a movie will constitute entering a contract, even in our moronic court system.
I was going to type a long post regarding property rights in the Roman heritage and the subtle propaganda that is the phrase "intellectual property", but I'm too bored of internet debate. Let me just say when it comes to copyright and patent law, consider the overall aim. NOT simply to benefit the creator, but benefit all of society, the consumer, and progress. This is why you are forced to publish how it works to get patent protection, which by the way is limited
monopoly for a limited
time. Otherwise you have to keep it secret and risk a competitor stealing your idea. Which brings me to a second consideration: it is simply human nature to look at what another is building, and then build it himself, and maybe improve it along the way. This is our right. This is our nature. To suggest that a person has rights to an idea(!) into perpetuity is an attack on humanity. To me, an attack on at least 400 hundred years of Enlightenment, the free flow of information that enabled the West to push technological progress farther than anyone in history.
That may seem sensationalistic but consider this, under the DMCA it is illegal "take apart" code and figure out how some software works. The software companies argue it is absolute, the coder community, much less, but so far have only taken the position that people have a right to know if there software is secure. Some countries (lobbied by American media companies) have even prohibited discussion of "hacking" (kind of like forums that prohibit talk on how to rip DVD's). Now how would the muscle car era have happened had GM and Ford taken the same position? Couple guys standing around a new Camaro, wondering how to make it faster, but don't open the hood!!! And you sure as hell better not take out the cam so you can put a better one in!! In fact, it is best to not even talk about it, lest the MAN bring the hammer down. Then again maybe Ford should be paying royalties to the family (corporation now) of the long dead genius that invented the wheel. I hope the Louvre paid Egypt a licensing fee for that glass pyramid out front.
I know someone might suggest that I'm blurring the line between copyright and patent, but consider this: if I build a little battery powered calculator it is patent law, BUT if I write a program that is functionally the same, it is copyright law. Interesting, no?
Everything coming out of big companies mouths is nothing but sophist legalese. There are higher aims, and human nature to consider. To promote those higher aims, modern society has thrown a bone to creators, a pat on the back and thank you, with a limited monopoly for limited time. But companies have taken this goodwill and demanded more, turning that goodwill into entitlement!! Now we have all sorts of nonsense and parsing of judgements is needed to understand just what the hell I can do with the movie I just bought. And hey, if I licensed the right to watch, than if I lose my disc they will send me a new one for $2 like MS will with windows right? No? Well I have many different devices, and I'm an on-the-go kind of guy in this on-the-go world, surely my license covers playing that media everywhere with the fee I paid? No?
Time to bring a little sense (and justice!) back to patent/copyright law.Edited by augerpro - 6/27/12 at 6:37pm