FreeGameDev

Imagine the entire copyright law (and similar laws) would suddenly be declared null and void in every country.

What would happen?

If it was sudden, as in, completely unannounced, there would be a brief period where the copyright industry scrambles to adapt to a world without copyright. There could be some minor market crashes. But everything would be fine in the end; just differences in how people make money off of creative works.

If, more realistically, this was a planned abolition, there would likely be a short period when copyright would remain in effect, giving the copyright industry plenty of time to adjust itself.

In the field of software, some currently proprietary programs would become libre (like some programs under licenses like CC BY-NC or no license at all; many Ren'Py games come to mind), and a major incentive for developing proprietary software would be taken away (not all of them, mind), but copyleft licenses would also lose their force, and proprietary programs would still be able to exist by virtue of keeping source code secret. Additionally, EULAs would still have some amount of force, though people would be able to get around them legally just by cracking the programs that have technical measures to prevent their use without signing.

I think the good would outweigh the bad, personally.

Wuzzy {l Wrote}:What would happen?

Many artist would need to change, since income from artworks is no granted as it was before.

The long term implications are hard to predict - will people still create high quality artwork, if they can't monetize it? Maybe, maybe not.

In short term, the free access to all works will result in a boost of all projects which depend on art. How long will this last? Difficult to say, again.

onpon4 {l Wrote}:I think the good would outweigh the bad, personally.

Me too, although IMO the perfect thing would be for works entering the public domain 15-25 years after publication.

The result would be a big market crash, since everything would become abundant, everything becomes worthless.

I'd say, that there would be a big change in the world. Rich people would turn poor in a few years. Future of media industry would not be so colorful too. All the rappers and rock stars would cry all day long.

You people are vastly over-estimating the extend of the copyright industry.

According to statistics quoted on the wikipedia:
Total revenue of the music industry has been relatively stable at around 15 billion US$
Total revenue of the movie industry has been relatively stable at around 35 billion US$

The games industry has according to a Google search about 90 billion US$ revenue.

I think the movie figure above is missing DVD sales and such so lets add another 30 billion or so.... so around 170 billion US$ world wide revenue. Of which of course not all would be lost if copyright would disappear. In fact I think for most alternative revenue sources like streaming services etc could be found, but lets assume a worst case scenario of it losing 70%, so a loss of 120 billion US$.

To put that in perspective, in 2014 The Ford Motor Company (yes a single, globally speaking not very significant car manufacturer) had a revenue of 119 billion US$.

P.S.: before you object, yes there are also other sectors with copyright in it, but most of those (for example commercial software) are even more likely to easily find alternative income models and thus would not be much effected.

Well you kind of forget patents that all rely on copyrights and are (supposedly at least) a huge driver in the industry, especially in the pharmaceutical/biotech industry, or all high tech branchs.
Intellectual property is worth waaaay more than 170 billion US$ world wide IMO.

I just read this awesome book on this topic, I just wish there were an English translation: http://framasoft.net/article3305.html

Patents do not "rely on copyrights". They have nothing to do with copyright.

Yes what onpon4 said, patents are a completely different story legally speaking and in fact I think a patent like law for artistic works (that would currently fall under copyright) would be a really good idea. The problem with patents are mostly software (and biotech) patents awarded for trivial works and now used for blackmailing other companies in those sectors or at the very least to stifle innovation. Outside of that I have yet to hear from anyone that the general idea behind patents is a bad concept...

Overall "intellectual property" is of course a different story and much more relevant to today's big business. The problem is that most of this was originally intended to protect the small innovators but has through lobbying turned into ways for big business to keep the competition down

I think the movie figure above is missing DVD sales and such so lets add another 30 billion or so.... so around 170 billion US$ world wide revenue. Of which of course not all would be lost if copyright would disappear. In fact I think for most alternative revenue sources like streaming services etc could be found, but lets assume a worst case scenario of it losing 70%, so a loss of 120 billion US$.

Though note that that money is not a loss to the economy - this doesn't mean that $120 billion has been lost; rather, $120 billion that used to be transferred from group A people to group B people is no longer transferred in that manner. The money still exists to be spent on other things.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think copyrights should be abolished (I'm not sure that many people hold that position?), but we should clarify what it really means when we talk about a loss.

The problem with patents are mostly software (and biotech) patents awarded for trivial works and now used for blackmailing other companies in those sectors or at the very least to stifle innovation. Outside of that I have yet to hear from anyone that the general idea behind patents is a bad concept...

So, if we ignore the reasons why they're bad, they're not really bad...?

Yes the hypothetical idea of them protecting the little guy from big companies and so on is very noble, but when that doesn't happen, it's an argument against them.

I think software patents have additional problems:
* Software can already be covered by copyright.
* Companies can and do protect algorithms by keeping things closed source; patents don't encourage people to make source code available.
* Control on algorithms is a control on mathematics.
* The argument of huge investment that is usually made for drug companies doesn't apply to software.

It's like writing code with a lawyer standing behind you saying "you can't write that", and then having to use suboptimal methods - except it's worse, as most programmers won't even know if a particular piece of code infringes on some patents, until they're sued.

I'm open to hearing about a system of software patents that would be designed in a way that is a good thing - but that's not the system we have, so I don't support the system that countries currently implement.

Regarding patents for art - what would that cover that copyrights do not?

I do have a problem with patents. The whole idea of them is to encourage people to publish good ideas, but the value of people publishing ideas is kind of small compared to the potential for harm a monopoly on use of an idea creates. The thing is, people have ideas all the time, and there are other reasons for people to publish them. Fame, for example. Or even business; after all, if an idea is locked in your head forever because you're paranoid about people "stealing" it, how could you ever make a business effort out of it?

Also, I don't think it makes sense to have "a patent like law for artistic works". How would that even work? Patents are monopolies on the use of ideas, and works are not mere ideas; they're expressions. If you're referring to requiring fees to obtain and keep the monopoly, rather than granting it automatically, then sure, I'd be in favor of that as well. Otherwise, I can't tell what you're thinking.

onpon4 {l Wrote}:If you're referring to requiring fees to obtain and keep the monopoly, rather than granting it automatically, then sure, I'd be in favor of that as well. Otherwise, I can't tell what you're thinking.

Yeah, mainly that and other more practical concepts that exist in the patent world but not in copyright, but I don't feel motivated right now to go into details

And I agree that there are many problems with patents as well, but if I was to reform copyright (as opposed to abolishing it) patent law would be the (admittedly also somewhat flawed) blue-print.

It will be a mess in absolutely all spheres of our life, and it will be very difficult to find a way out.
So we really need a copyright..

If copyright disappeared nothing much would happen, accept a load of idiots complaining about it,

Although I would go mental in appreciation that we might actually be getting somewhere towards a sane world.

Triple A games would disappear or become more marketing/advertising funded.

Outside of that, game development funding would transition to the crowd funding model.

Deleted.

FaTony {l Wrote}:

charlie {l Wrote}:Outside of that, game development funding would transition to the crowd funding model.

Just as it supposed to be.

Not really. You end up with a lot of pissed off customers and missold promises.

The number of crowd funded projects that meet their goals is shockingly low (anecdotal evidence only, but I've yet to encounter one that has), even more so if you factor in time.

Everything wouldn't actually change much though after the shock dies down. Proprietary games would still be closed source, and those who copy it don't care anyway. People would still buy the things.

We will buy things again.. but not original and "fake" things will be in whole world in big quantities.

toothbrush {l Wrote}:We will buy things again.. but not original and "fake" things will be in whole world in big quantities.

No, I don't think that would be the case. Just look at the free games on this forum - I'm not saying there aren't unofficial copies but nearly all downloads are from an official source. And those are extremely easy to copy, and to "fake". Physical things would not be copied much at all, as there would be no major point in it.

Deleted.

Yeah.

Maybe it's right for you.. But if you know it's not copy, you feel better , isn't it?

Deleted.