Copyright rules and “Fair Use” Guidelines (Do politicians care about “fair”?)

So many “rules” for “copyright”..

They had to do some “fair use” guidelines to keep copyright from exposing itself as so ridiculously arbitrary:

How can you measure “transformative” exactly?
How can you measure “nature of work” exactly?
How can you measure “the amount used” for everything and anything that falls under copyright jurisdiction?
How can you measure “market affected” especially after the fact? Would’a could’a?

For patents, how much of an algorithm or idea or set of ideas should get a patent monopoly? Should the 3-D software for making a gun get either a patent or a copyright, or both? What about the case where the 3-D printed model is the same as the factory model? Either one consists really of the steps to make a gun.

The Bible shows how silly it can get with translations. There are over 100 “translations” of the Bible in English. Each one of them MUST differ from every one of the others by an arbitrary legal percentage in order to get its own “copyright” enforcement grant. A couple of words less, or more.. And is this enforced in detail?

The best selling book of all time is a big market. Lots of filthy lucre. So government monopoly grants over copying of books creates an arbitrary royalty and litigation industry that would not exist otherwise, and really lobotomizes the free market and promotion of great ideas for mankind.

The result is that maybe half of what people pay for sophisticated new technology items is for these politician-created industry. And supports lobbyists who work really hard to keep it that way.


%d bloggers like this: