Levi

Luckily however, too many industries rely on the written word and the ability to profit from it. Advertising messages tied in with trademarks (which would come under fire if copyright did), for example.

The pirates who want to do away with copyright are speaking out their posterior regions. It will never happen. The business world would fall into anarchy and we would have a massive economic crumble. There are also way too many corporations and individuals who would revolt and create such a fuss that copyright would have to be reinstated for polite civilization to move forward. I know I’d be there ranting and raving and picketing.

Imagining a world without copyright protection is like imagining a world without government. It will never happen. The second copyright was done away with, just like government, a new similar system would be set up to protect authors. There is power in numbers and force is the only way some power is kept. That’s how the law works, by intimidation and force. I have no reason to believe it would be any diff with copyright.

I agree that the younger generation has a strong sense of entitlement. They act as if artists are their slaves. And it’s because they don’t comprehend or appreciate the hard work that goes into creating something for their entertainment. ALL workers in every other field are compensated, no one is profited off of without fair compensation, but in the art world, many want to change that.

First, a minor aside: one doesn’t copyright or not copyright a work of art. Under current law, a work of art is copyright the moment it becomes a tangible item, that is, a book, a script, a painting, a poem written or printed on paper, etc. One may choose whether to protect that copyright or not, but not whether to copyright it or not.

On to the major point: yes, it is, of course, hyperbolic to say that we are headed to a “world without any art.” Yes, there will, of course, always be art. If, as I have postulated elsewhere, art is any distinct and deliberate attempt to create an aesthetic impact upon the observer or listener, then among any dozen people, half of them will produce art at least sporadically, and one or two will produce art frequently. There will be art.

What there will not be, in a world without any means to protect the ownership of intellectual property, is art that is produced by people who have dedicated their lives to its production, and which is distributed in any meaningful way to any meaningful portion of the people on Earth. Art will become less accessible, not more so.

Which seems to be a bit at odds with what seems to be the favorite argument among the pro-piracy crowd: that art should be freely available to everyone.

Certainly I agree with all of your points as to the legal matters—and moral matters—of protecting the commercial aspect of art that is produced to be commercial (commercial art is not bad and non-commercial art is not a ‘given good’). And certainly I know that these are ‘rants’, but I did want to chime in that a differentiation needs to be made on a few points: if an artist wishes to combine his or her art with commercial endeavor—if an artist wishes to try to earn a living based on their art—certainly there are laws in place and these should be protected (as your parallel about social security numbers etc. says). But, the vast majority of artists do not produce art to make a living, and principally there is no connection between the commercial success of one piece of writing and the ability of an artist to produce another. The arguments in favor of piracy are tedious and silly and grating, yes, but do remember that piracy only has to do with the business angle of art and it really has to be reinforced that this is only one aspect of art. Art not only predates art-as-commerce but the world could get all post-apocalyptic and art will continue. There isn’t going to be a world without art. However, I am in full support of your statements that an artist who does (and rightfully does, I don’t disparage it) want to pursue commercial avenues or combine their financial well being with their art should be able to, under the full and vast protection of the law, and should not be at the mercy of the opinions of artists who do not want to—it is silly for an artist who doesn’t care about copyright law to even talk about why copyright law doesn’t matter, they should just not copyright their work and let you copyright yours—they go your way, you go yours.
Cheers.