Sunday, 4 September 2022

Property as right and commodity

 The term copyright is somewhat misleading. The copy part is still accurate but the right has become outdated. Originally pioneering authors like Victor Hugo fought for the right to decide how their works were used and adapted, but over the years the concept has exploded into a maze of confusing legalities and commodities to be traded and sold. 

Recently a case has come up that shows the distinction between copyright the ideal and copyright the reality. Youtube channel Business Casual (BCs) and its lawsuits against Youtube and the Russian state. They've made an informative video documenting the situation and their side of the dispute.

Given my stance on intellectual property it may be surprising that I'm somewhat sympathetic to BCs plight. It does seem that the Russia Today network has been taking their content and Youtube has been covering for them because they're good for Youtube's business. But I do find BCs incredulity at the situation especially their lamenting of a betrayal of "American Values" rather hard to sympathise with. How naive must you be to believe that businesses do anything but what's good for business (or more accurately, what they think will be good for business) when left to their own devices. Money has no nationality or morals.

This blatant unfairness is what motivates the majority of the people who support the free information and open culture movements. Copyright isn't a right that applies equally to all, it openly privileges the established wealthy and the legally entrenched. Its no surprise to me that Youtube supports big channels, for years its been a joke amongst users that the best way to get your channel restored and issues resolved is to complain publicly via a twitter count with a lot of followers. Its also no surprise that the judges found in favour of the clients with many powerful law firms. 

I face this issue all the time, multiple times a month my channel with get copyright claims on content I know is public domain as I've spent days and even weeks checking, and yet every time I challenge them I have to weigh the potential damage a lawsuit will do to me. I'm just an individual, these are companies with their own legal departments and some have well established reputations for being vindictive. This is ultimately the reality of modern day intellectual property, on paper you have a right but the real question is do you have the means to fight for it? If the answer is no than your right functionally does not exist.

BC is still working through their suit against the Russian government and has vowed to continue fighting Youtube, so they may eventually after much time and resources see some results, but they aren't exactly amateurs with a built in laptop and microphone. I hope despite BCs negative commentary in the above video, the channel owners will learn from this episode that copyright as it stands is fundamentally broken and join in the efforts to end the excesses.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Labels

1810s (1) 1880s (2) 1890s (4) 1900s (3) 1910s (6) 1920s (16) 1930s (8) 1940s (7) 1950s (4) 1960s (2) 1970s (4) 1980s (1) 2000s (1) 2010s (1) 2020s (1) Activism (1) Adverts (1) Animation (7) archive matters (1) Canada (1) comics (3) Copyright Reform (1) Disney (4) Documentaries (3) Drama (2) Essays (32) Europe (1) Fantasy (2) Film (19) George Orwell (5) Germany (2) Greta Garbo (1) horror (2) images (7) LGBTQ (1) Newsreels (3) Noir (1) Open Media (1) photography (1) poetry (3) Reviews (1) Robert frost (1) Romance (2) Science Fiction (2) Silent (3) texts (24) thrillers (1) translation (1) UK (3) Videogames (1) War movies (3) Westerns (1)