I've always found that defending laws that don't benefit people to be a stange attitude on a place called "hacker news".
Creative people should be able to create. Trademark/copyright laws, protecting assets for the great-grandchildren of who actually created the art, has never been a positive. The only people who benefit, are themselves not creative (or else they would create, instead of defending "rights" and "image").
How about protecting assets for the people who made the art in the first place, geeze.
And seriously wtf why shouldn't, like, Jack Kirby's grandkids get a share of the huge bounty of stuff he created for Marvel, but Elon Musk gets to inherit emerald mines from his dad?
Humans go from birth to being released into the public domain as an adult in roughly that time. Why are ideas somehow not in the Public Domain after a generation has grown up?
That way Jack Kirby gets to make his money. Jack's kids can live off his money. But Jack's ideas are free to use after doing their time.
IP is not scarce, in the sense that you can have your own intelectual product that does the same than others, and you having and using an idea don't limit other people ability to have and use similar ideas. But one emerald mine is just one, and only one person can extract from it at any given time. Thus property laws as a replacement of stick-and-stone laws take place.
If you feel that your idea is worth IP protection, just protect it as a trade secret, not as a patent or copyright. Very famously Disney have a copyright over drawing three close circles.
The number of conglomerates has, unsurprisingly, continued to shrink. It's long overdue for a rethink. Maybe if the US political system ever stabilizes, we might get to it in a hundred years. Until then Copyright sucks and Disney is bad.
>but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay?
How is it not ok? What is the issue exactly? From what I can tell it's totally free, and has an indication it is a fan game on the bottom of the screen.
> How is it not ok? What is the issue exactly? From what I can tell it's totally free, and has an indication it is a fan game on the bottom of the screen.
Trademark violation. Trademarks protect consumers, not producers. Surely you can't be advocating for relaxing consumer protections?
Except it's not claiming to be official content and I don't see how it is harming anyone, or do you think the letter of the law is more important than the spirit of it?
Usage of the trademark is a claim to official content. That's kinda the point of a trademark. The Starcraft font and logo as presented on the screen is a claim to be official content. That the fine-print clarifies "well, not really" doesn't make the claim go away.
If you were allowed to use a trademark "Coke" and tack on "well, not really" in the fine-print, it's still infringement.
It's to protect the consumer who doesn't read the fine-print.
We don't want a situation where where have cans of "Coke" at the supermarket with a 2mm-high "not really" printed on the back of the can.
Just do like they do in Japan where you have Gundam fighting Pokemon, but you have to use a new, unique name for it. "Fighting Pon" instead of GundamXPokemon
> creators should be allowed to exert control over how their assets and brand are used
I hate to be glib, but no they shouldn't.
Creators should be allowed to create things and sell them. No one, whether the creator, or the company the creator worked for when they first created the thing, should be able to stop someone else from creating something.
> Creators should be allowed to create things and sell them.
I'm in two minds over this.
In a free for all, money wins. No small-money creator would get to profit from a truly great idea. Someone with more money simply copies it, builds it bigger/faster/better-logistics with more market budget.
At least let the creator sign over rights to their idea - even if the terms are unfair.
But once an object is in your hands. It should be free for you to do what you want with it for yourself. Deadmau5 legalities over his purrari should not be a thing.
See my sibling reply elsethread - you really don't want to be advocating for reducing consumer protections. You think you are advocating for a reduction in producer protections, but trademarks protect consumers, not producers.
Copyright sucks, and Disney is bad etc, but how is using StarCraft and its assets in your random AI game okay?
I mean, creators should be allowed to exert control over how their assets and brand are used.