Skip to content
0:00 / 0:00

#copyright#karlfogel#intellectualproperty

The Surprising History of Copyright and What It Means For...

Google TechTalks

349K subscribers • 62 videos on Hallway

YouTube
  • Recommended by 2 people: 2 on Hacker News.
  • A classic. People kept recommending it from 2016 to 2021.
  • Presented by Karl Fogel, open source developer and author
  • An opinion. It argues one side of a question engineers disagree on.

Beginner. No background in the topic needed.

19K views19 years ago2 recommendations

History and cultureTools and practiceHistory of computingOpen source

Karl Fogel traces the history of copyright from 16th-century censorship to modern distribution, exploring alternative economic models for creators.

Google Tech Talks August 15, 2006 Karl Fogel ABSTRACT Copyright is derived from a 16th-century English censorship law, later turned into a monopoly right to subsidize distribution. This history is somewhat at odds with the modern conception of copyright, and an understanding of it is increasingly important today, as the economics of distribution are changing radically. This talk will give the audience a mid-level overview of copyright's history, with pointers to further reading, followed by a survey of alternative economic bases for creation and distribution, and a discussion of what these dynamics mean for companies, like Google, that flourish in an environment of frictionless information...

Why it's here

2 people recommend this

What people say. Recommended for its insightful historical analysis of copyright and its arguments against traditional intellectual property models.

syshumon Hacker News • Recommends

On ““DRM is Used to Lock in, Control and Spy on Users””

…rom more people is being created today that at any point in human history runs counter to your statement Copyright is about protecting the Gatekeepers, the Movies Studios, the Music Labels, the Book Publisher, not about protecting creators. Karl Fogel does a great job explaining the History of copyright and why is it not needed to protect creators link to this video >> it's our own propensity to not respect the rights of the creator which has encouraged the adoption of DRM. I do not recognize them as rights. Copyright is a Positive Right created by government. I am a supporter of Negative Rights theory and do not support any Positive rights at all >>The rest of your argument centers on DRM; it is not j…

syshumon Hacker News • Recommends

On “Chrome 55-57 showed “download” button for all HTML5 media”

>>Copyright limitations are a reasonable thing for society to extend to content producers. No they really are not, and have never been Copyright, historically, is a tool for Information Gatekeeping, censorship, and profiteering. Not one of benfiting the Creators of content See the Talk on the History of Copyright link to this video We see this every day in the modern era where copyright is used to censor critics, prevent research (especially security research), and prevents more content from being created by locking up ideas for over a century Copyright is a Negative for Society, and for Creators

exo762on Hacker News • Recommends

On “Apple enabling client-side CSAM scanning on iPhone tomorrow”

Why would any fan of someones work buy a knock-off copy? We can safely assume they are a fan, otherwise why would even buy it? Also, painting is a physical object. It's a one of a kind. EDIT: your objection and many many other questions like that are nicely argued against here: link to this video (The Surprising History of Copyright talk by Karl Fogel)

the_ancienton Hacker News • Mentions

On “Wikimedia removes the Diary of Anne Frank due to copyright law”

>> The purpose of copyright is to provide an incentive to produce creative works False, the purpose, and only reason for copy right is to promote the useful sciences, all other reasons are UnConstitutional (from a US Stand point anyway) The Surprising History of Copyright: link to this video link

syshumon Hacker News • Mentions

On “Internet Archive responds to publishers’ lawsuit”

…ht all creative work would cease. OpenSource software, Open Documentation Projects, and the huge amount of Free Culture works fly in the face of that statement. Further it is provable and self evidently false that publishers and traditional publishing models are the only or even best method to fund creative works in the 21st century 1 link 2 link to this video…