• TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Reasonable control in the legal sense does matter though. Right now, a majority of creatives don’t own their IP in the legal sense, and they can’t stop large companies from milking their works dry as a result. In the absence of IP laws, creatives would be able to create their works, but they’d also be competing against companies that have the resources to monetize, influence the general public, and kill the franchise through poor choices.

    It’s really important to know that the vast majority of people aren’t going to have the goodwill to tip or otherwise support free works, and it’s even less likely if a large company does enough marketing to overshadow an artist.

    • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m getting the sense that you didn’t actually watch the whole video, because your only two points in this comment,

      In the absence of IP laws, creatives would be able to create their works, but they’d also be competing against companies that have the resources to monetize, influence the general public, and kill the franchise through poor choices.

      And

      It’s really important to know that the vast majority of people aren’t going to have the goodwill to tip or otherwise support free works, and it’s even less likely if a large company does enough marketing to overshadow an artist.

      , are answered during the video, and I don’t see you arguing the points made by him, you’re just straight up stating the opposite.

      And your first point,

      Right now, a majority of creatives don’t own their IP in the legal sense, and they can’t stop large companies from milking their works dry as a result.

      , is about how the current system doesn’t work to protect actual artists, yet does work to protect large IP-pimping companies.