Hello everyone I started this discussion on telegram but wanted to expand upon on here. I haven’t seen this anywhere but what is Liberland’s position on copyrights, patents and trademarks? One would think Liberland takes a neutral stance as there is nowhere to register these instruments where one registers a new company in the blockchain or is it in the works currently. We have to think like a nation state and they all have depositories of some sort the blockchain is very innovative and the future there needs to be a discussion on length on copyrights, what treaties to adopt, etc. Since is supposed to be libertarian in nature I think there will be great debate as to how to implement such a mechanism.
1 Like
This is a very interesting subject, and I’ve thought a lot about it in the past. There are some things we should be aware of when considering copyright:
- No one has the moral right to forbid you from pressing any virtual on-screen buttons, no matter what you do by doing so. Or from browsing wherever you like. Whatever is available online, no one should be punished just for consuming it.
- No one can prove that 1 copy equals 1 sale—or less, or more. No one can quantify that; there’s no direct relation between them.
- When you copy something, you multiply it—you don’t steal anything from anyone, because they still have it.
Digital goods are a new and very special kind of good. While the ease of copying can hurt profits from sales, it also helps truly high-quality products spread more easily online. This makes it possible for someone to achieve a real breakthrough “from their bedroom” without any help from the industry—which has happened before. What we have here is a natural quality selection process for digital goods.
I believe no one should ever be punished for downloading music, movies, or software. The same goes for uploading. I also think Creative Commons licensing is a sane approach that fits our new digital age.
2 Likes
Good afternoon, everyone.
This is a very interesting topic.
And very relevant in a world of progress in which there are already 8 billion.
My opinion is that the main rights to the product has its creator.
The rest are only users of the product.
If it is available in the public domain, you can use it.
But if the creator of the product decides otherwise, he has every right to do so.
And it is desirable to check everything.
Because you know, there is a lot of experience, when someone appropriates someone else’s or created by the whole country and proclaims himself director of some plant or field that belongs to everyone.
Respectfully.
Andrii.
1 Like
The problem is that the creator just cannot “decide otherwise.” They are dealing with data that can be multiplied. Essentially, it’s a whole different level compared to everything else. That decision also means there should be some kind of enforcement against copying. We all know that is futile and that the law in that case just cannot be applied to everyone - there are just too many people pushing the on-screen buttons.
So then we come to the sneaky business practice of distribution companies offering out-of-court settlements to random downloaders, which has actually become a business model. All of this happens while the profits of creators are eaten by the industry. So it’s all very rotten to the core, IMO.
Sane creators should be aware of all the things mentioned here and in my previous posts and just accept the fact that people who can download something for free will actually do it - and they will further share it. It’s just a fact of life. I guess many creators already have that stance, but the problem we have here is the industry, which is ruining people’s lives for its own profits.
Respect digital data. It’s a different beast.
2 Likes
Very valid points indeed i brought this topic under the idea that the regime of copyrights are a very bad idea. The United States DMCA is wrought with false accusations against people who are using content under the fair use doctrine which is a first amendment right. Also the idea of perpetual copyright that the UK has had in the past is very absurd and nothing like that should ever exist I also think that if a copyright were to exist, it should not extend beyond the life of that person and the concept of copyright was to protect the book publishers not the author as discussed earlier we should not as a country ratify or endorse any treaty like WIPO, TRIPS and the Berne Convention for example in the realm of copyrights. There are lots of other things in the world of treaties that need to be discussed but I think this should be one of the first for our new country to have an open talk on.
1 Like