@ Predrag Supurovic
moralno pravo u Americi nije priznato, pogledaj prethodne komentare, jer nismo definisali vreme i mesto o diskusiji (planeta Zemlja)
Beneficije i mane autorskih prava je posmatrano iz ekonomskog ugla, trziste ne moze da postoji samo ako imas proizvodjaca, prema tome moras da pogledas i kupca, i njihovu interakciju. Izvor WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization citat dole.
@la.linea
Sta je poenta, vec je bilo.
Cela rasprave je posla od "kradja". Ako se procita taj zakon, ta rec se neupotrebljava, vec povreda autorskog prava. Zakonadavac je bio svestan o reci "kradja" koja defininisana u krivicna dela protiv imovine, ali je svesno napravio razliku pa koristi povredu autorskog prava, cime oznacava da im nije isti smisao. Posto drugi komentatori se neslazu sa tim i dalje tvrde kradja, diskusija se nastavlja.
@2012
Posto govorimo o Amerci:
Ustav Amerike definise
"Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to
Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"
Oni su definisali u svom ustavu da im skupstina moze da promovisati napredak u nauci i korsnim vestinama (Arts nije samo umetnost), zasticujeci za ograniceno vreme za autore i pronalazace eksluzivna prava za njihova spiske i pronalske.
Koja prava i koje vreme to definisu u svom zakonu o autorskim pravima.
Znaci svaki put kad vices autori imaju prava, moras da znas, ko im je dao, i zasto to pravo postoji, mada me nebi cudilo da je razlog zato sto postoji, pa postoji u drugim zemljama.
Ideja da ljudi nista ne bi stvarali u muzici, pisanju, i drugim oblastima je netacno, kako objasniti da se na Youtube stavlja 300 sati materijala svakog minuta. Pogledao sam istrazivanje i jedno koje sam nasao je samo savet zakonodavce da statisticki nemogu da dokazu da "copyright" pomaze povecanju broja radova, ali to isto i neznaci da autorska prava treba odbaciti.
Za kritiku beneficija i mana autorskih prava obrati se WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization, citati dole
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ces,_Engineering,_and_Medicine
i pogledaj ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF COPYRIGHT The Empirical Evidence So Far
onda
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/IPCoop/89land1.html William M. Landes and Richard A. Posner
"Copyright protection—the right of the copyright’s owner to prevent others from making copies—trades off the costs of limiting access to a work against the benefits of providing incentives to create the work in the first place. Striking the correct balance between access and incentives is the central problem in copyright law. For copyright law to promote economic efficiency, its principal legal doctrines must, at least approximately, maximize the benefits from creating additional works minus both the losses from limiting access and the costs of administering copyright protection."
Za one sa slabijim Engleskim, Centralni problem zakona o autorskim pravima je balans izmendju pristupa i motivacije (znaci korisnika i autora)
Pa onda WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_econstat_wp_9.pdf razni odlomci ceo tekst je 19 strana iz 2013:
"Table 1. Effects of the Copyright System – A Conceptual Framework
Effect on
creative
supply
- Positive incentive for creators and right
holders to create, supply and finance
creative works induced by prospect of
remuneration
- Positive effect on follow-on creators as
more creative works act as inspiration.
Copyright also provides for a
framework clarifying how to license,
and re-use creative works of others
Reduced follow-on creativity induced by
fact that copyright might reduce access,
increase price, and outlaw unauthorised
adaptations and other re-uses of creative
works
Effect on
access by the
end user
- The above positive effect on creative
supply will positively influence the
availability of creative works
Increased cost of access for the end user
and limitations on if, how and when the
content can be accessed
Institutional
and
administrative
effects
- The copyright system allows to
transact and collaborate with IP as the
main coordination vehicle
- Administration and transaction costs
created by the copyright system
(deadweight-loss)
2 Transposing Copyrights to the Internet : What Impacts on the Baseline Copyright
Economics Model?
First, the increased availability of digital technologies, and the Internet in particular, have
arguably and on first sight significantly lowered the costs to create, copy and distribute
creative works on a global scale in a quasi instantaneous fashion.
Undoubtedly, this paradigm shift has the potential to stimulate access and creativity.
At the same time, the same tools facilitate the piracy of creative works as the variable cost of
copying and disseminating unauthorized copies is reduced to close to zero.
Second, the rise of the Internet as new distribution channel has introduced a change as to
how works are made accessible and as to how revenues are generated and shared.
3. What has the Economic Literature produced so far and What Data Issues remain as
Obstacles?
How then has the economic literature reacted to the role of copyright in an era of digitization
and electronic networks?
In a somewhat unfortunate turn of events, the majority of the empirical economic literature
since the advent of the Internet has focused on the effect of unauthorized downloading of
creative works on the sale of the creative industries, with a particular focus on music and
more recently films.
This new ‘Peer-to-peer download and copyright’-economics literature has produced some
tentative but ambiguous results and two camps of economists, those that assert that
unauthorized file-sharing has substantially decreased music industry revenues and those
that argue the opposite.
Transposing what happens in the field of music to the other creative sectors is also a stretch;
the lessons learnt could be sector-specific. Definitely with technology changing swiftly the
question is whether throwing darts at this moving target is a worthwhile pursuit.
More fundamentally, and stepping outside of the peer-to-peer literature, the effects of the
new digital set-up on creative supply and thus the long-term sustainability of this new digital
ecosystem have hardly been assessed from a solid empirical point of view. However it
must be assumed that this knowledge gap ought to be addressed for the sake of policymaking.
1. First, statistics are missing on the number of copyright works and hence the quantity of
creative works supplied which are meant to be positively stimulated, in part, through
copyright law.
2. Secondly, the quality and ‘value’ of copyright works are hard to objectively assess, in
particular when one moves beyond economic value for the content industry alone,
and if one is required to assess the economic value for the creator, or, more complex,
the artistic value for society at large.
3. Thirdly, data is missing on the revenues generated on the basis of copyright and the
respective distribution of these revenues between creators, the creative industries,
and other intermediaries.
4. Fourth, and related to the point on costs, little convincing data is available on the
administrative and transactions costs related to copyright, and in which way the
system facilitates or creates barriers.
5. Finally, data on the pricing and the consumption of creative works would be needed
to assess the access constraints potentially imposed by copyrights. "
To nisu moje zelje mozes reci da drustvo ima zelju koje formalizuje u obliku zakona i one se menjaju pa i sama Bernovska konvecija se menjala 1886, 1896, 1908, 1914, 1928, 1948, 1967, 1971, 1979. Da govorimo da li zakon iz Srbije 2015 zabranjuje, ja bih se sa tobom slozio, ali ti neces da se slozis da to nije kradja iako se i sami zakonodavci neslazu sa tobom. Ti oces da prebacis sa civilnog na kriminalni zakon, a nema dokaza da to uopste ima smisla. To ti je jacu se osecati dobro, ali ako to uradis ti pravis trosak drustvu i u ovom trenutku mi nemamo prave informacije da napravimo dobru odluku.
Kao sto sam vec naveo od prvog komentara, 3 efekta postoji koji zahtevaju akciju i koja tipicno ima 3 oblika status quo, zabrana i prihvacenje.
Efekti, nova technologija, siroka javnost se srece po prvi autoskim pravima(navedi kako si kao prosecan gradjanin u '50 mogao masovno da krsis autorska prava), beskonocna dobra
status quo- ciniti nista
zabrane - da li to drustvu vredi da zabranjuje, da li maksimizovanje prava za autore donosi beneficiji drustvu u celini, ili samo vise troskova (direktni inspektori, tuzioci, sudovi, zatvori, indirektni edukacija, inovacija)
prihvatanje - ozakoni se pristup
Dok se zakon sredi, sta onda stvaralac da radi? Menja svoj poslvoni metod.
[Ovu poruku je menjao tahuti dana 07.11.2015. u 02:16 GMT+1]
[Ovu poruku je menjao tahuti dana 07.11.2015. u 02:22 GMT+1]