Laws

[Slizor]

What are the purposes of laws in a democratic society? Is it to enforce the morality of the majority? Is it to peoples' protect rights? If so, then what if the rights clash? (i.e. right to life and right to free speech in regard to racism.) What do you think?

[JudgeDredd]

i find the best way to the heart of any legal requirement is to consider how it will face up to changes in advancing technology..

Here's a case to consider; in copyright law i can't use a pure video clip from any movie. But i could film myself acting, and then morph my character perfectly with that of my favorite actor.. now how far similar to my repersentation would the end media have to be.. not to breach copyright?

Ok, if it's half my image and character, and a mix of three or more other actors from random films, and edited backgrounds, and my own new layered backgrounds mixed into a brand new plot or sub-plot ..what about that??

Which production company would feel they have the right to sue me? Wouldn't they sue me only when i'm getting famous?

Basically Copyright Law will break down - and so it should!

Other laws face similar technical issues, as for example, the using of web-cam-cellfones in public places breaches one's personal right to privacy.

[arnamenta]

At 5/21/03 05:50 PM, Judge_Dredd wrote:

: Basically Copyright Law will break down - and so it should!

Why should it? Don't the people who spend so much time and energy creating these things deserve some compensation? As a writer, I'd be very upset if I found someone else was benefiting from my work without compensating me.

This site has tons of creative people around. I wonder how many of them would appreciate having their work stolen?

[FUNKbrs]

I think the purpose of law should be to only protect peoples rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And further more, fuck copyrights, the only people they make rich are lawyers.

*disclaimer FUNK is plastered.

[Jlop985]

Laws are made to enforce majority rule and preserve minority rights, while not becoming too intrusive... ideally.

[bumcheekcity]

At 5/21/03 03:07 PM, Slizor wrote: What are the purposes of laws in a democratic society? Is it to enforce the morality of the majority? Is it to peoples' protect rights? If so, then what if the rights clash? (i.e. right to life and right to free speech in regard to racism.) What do you think?

Laws are made for the law-abiding. If you are going to kill someone. You'd kill them weather or not the law says you shouldn't.

[JudgeDredd]

At 5/21/03 07:57 PM, arnamenta wrote: As a writer, I'd be very upset if I found someone else was benefiting from my work without compensating me.

ok, i'll try to oversimplify what is a very complex issue;

..when you are born - you know nothing at all, right!

As you grow and learn from people and experience, you develop a way of telling your story or concepts based on these things you've experienced (art or writing or acting) - including techniques you've learnt from other peoples media.

How much of your experience is yours and yours only? How much is a re-hash of someone elses media but spun within a new realm of your own fantasy. Your interpretaion might be wholly original, but that wouldn't make it popular in the mass media (popularity being a perfect blending of many peoples mindsets ;)

ok. Your new creative publication might be your own auto-biograhy. Does that then preclude others from writing your Biography? Isn't that a breach of your privacy? Can they write your biography with their own spin of fantasy added? Wouldn't that worry you to be so mis-represented?

Where is the truth then? Who will say for sure - maybe the public will become aware that all your creative publications are merely a spin on real life.. whatever the case, fame (of you or your media) is the telling factor that will make you money - nothing else!

Much of the creativity in media production involves a large staff who are broadly told what to do, and so get paid in the development of that media and not on a long term residual basis (copyright) ..only the production house and their lawyers will really profit from those copyrights.

The bigger the production company the more easy to law suit the small guy. But if a big company "steals" your work, can you really afford to sue them back? Well maybe.. but only if the court claim is worth more than the lawyers fees.. ok, what if they appeal and keep it in court until you've sold your house..... you are getting old and grey fighting some big faceless corporation... yeah, time to write your autobiography!

[PreacherJ]

At 5/22/03 01:41 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: Laws are made for the law-abiding. If you are going to kill someone. You'd kill them weather or not the law says you shouldn't.

Oh, bummy, that's a little ridiculous. You're advocating anarchy, here. If there weren't any laws in place, there's a shitload of people who wouldn't be among us today, from my hand alone. Now that might make me a bad person, but I guarantee you'd cheer me for turning at least a few of them into fertilizer, given the circumstances. There's also a host of stuff I'd steal, because, hey- I need beer, and I don't have any money this weekend.

[arnamenta]

I agree that the idea of laws being only for the law-abiding is faulty. Perhaps a better way of putting it would be that laws are for those who have realized that it's in the best interests of everyone if we manage somehow to work together. Yes, we all choose to obey the law, but that's for our own (and everyone else's) good.