That is catchy, but true for any economic enterprise. It is even true for the biggest capitalist states. You are easily impressed.

Oh yeah? And what exactly is collective property representative of?

What exactly is not caring about an individual representative of, only caring about the collective? Is it not communism?

Actually, historically seen, communism and fascism were both about the collective and said 'fuck individualism'. It seems that many contemporary historians deem communism and fascism to be quite alike.

But we're not here to discuss history or politics, but copyright.

Yes, I can see how that would be your opinion on meaningful conversation, after yet again attacking my beliefs for me politely stating them.

Thank you.

There are extremely rare examples of where that is not true, and when it's not, it's in the content creator's best interest to continue with his work - basically, what I would agree with is legalization of the concept of 'abandonware'. When a product is effectively abandoned for a certain period of time - as in, not maintained by the rightholders - anymore, I feel rightholders should quite simply lose their rights to it. And that carries over to my next statement:

... they should lose their rights to it because, by releasing a work of art, they are both drawing from and adding to the cultural pool of our entire civilization. They should, of course, be compensated for their work properly, but their work should also never get lost to time, as that's effectively losing heritage which was shaping our culture troughout the time.

Well, not only that - what I want is ... Basically, I want copyright system to not suck :-P I find it ridiculous that companies fight over words in the vocabulary - I find even more ridiculous that they effectively have to so they don't set the wrong precedent.

Yes, I know, and open sourcing software is always the best scenario I can imagine. Even if the software then does effectively become abandonware, it can still be maintained and built upon.

Well, to be perfectly honest, that's exactly what would happen in the case of public domain as well. I mean you don't see people releasing Mozart's music under the same name left and right nowadays, pretending to be the man. The accumulated prestige author gets when creating a work will not go away with people making copies of his work, and this would also effectively cut away companies leeching on success of those creators, whom they are supposed to protect. As I said tho, all this can be achieved by making copyright laws reasonable - which won't happen, so we might as well get rid of them altogether.

Yeah, and I think there is some confusion about IP laws here also.

Correct me if I am wrong, but if Sqeenix made the first Tomb Raider games public domain today, it still do not mean that you are free to use the Lara Croft character as you like - the IP is still owned by Squeenix. It just means that the game and the engine is now in public domain.

I think I made a meaningful conversation, propably got a little bit carried off, but still.

Sorry man, but I am going to attack everyone who wants to poke their nose into my rights.

My stuff, my creations, my beliefs = my property, my choice, so GTFO if you want to control me (ofc, as long as I'm not hurting anyone else with it) - these are my beliefs.

You clearly disagree, and dont care about all that, so what more can I do in terms of a meaningful conversation?

I stated that I care about that stuff, you stated that you dont, and if somebody uses your stuff in order to make profit, or makes your stuff public domain while you're still alive, you're perfectly OK with it.

Well, I'm not. As I said, it should be your choice.

The 'worst' thing is that you do make some good points, but this notion of not respecting living person's rights to his creation, is simply not fair.

I agree that there definitely could be something done about it, but the priority should still be on the choice of the creator.

Whatever I create - write a book, record an album, make a game: help yourself, take it. When I'm already dead, that is. Unless I decide to give it away while I'm still alive, of course.

You think copyrighting words like 'Saga' doesnt piss me off? Of course it does, because it's bullshit. Thats a separate matter, however.

No, absolutely not.

They could make their own Planescape Torment 2. Or 3, or 9001.

What's wrong with you?
How many people rage about fan mods?
How many people rage about unfaithful sequels made by corrent copyright holders that "ruined the franchise"?
What have you been smoking?

...yes? Awesome? Hooray?
Or do you want to strip the "individual" of his right to write a sequel?

When everything is legislated (and I don't mean restricted, just has a defined boolean legal/illegal status), "rights" are a zero-sum game, and appealing to hypothetical rights is pure dumbfuckery. Every "right to" is an infringement of someone else's "right to". The best set of right is the one that makes the majority of people the happiest. Fuck the individual. Fuck him with full force.

Did I dispute that? You were talking about taking human rights away. Maybe you shouldn't use political systems in your cause against public domain works, it is not helping you.

That would be like me saying: "Man, if you don;t want public domain, you're a feudalist! And that's bad, k?"

How is it not taking rights away? Thats taking away the right to rule over my creation. If you make me give something to public domain, you're taking away my freedom by making me do something against my will.
You're taking away my say in what happens to the stuff I create.

Yeah, how dare they finance new films and video games off classics? HOW DARE THEEEEY!!!!???!?!!!!

No, you can still create and sell whatever you want. Just other people can,too. Sounds like capitalism and freedom to me.

Of course they can, their own stuff. What happens to my stuff while I'm still alive is my say.

Rightsholders finance fuck all off classics. They finance their newer stuff with profits from recent releases.

That is fascist, sir! You are taking their human rights away!

Any income helps a company to persist and if the company produces games that income will support the development of new games. Sure, in case of big publishers that's bound to be a fraction of what they make with their newer releases but it's still something.