We might simplify the topic: Copyright is also a network - "all in the name of preserving Top 40 music, reality TV shows, and Ashton Kutcher movies."
Computers are a network even without internet. (you can carry floppies) This network does everything. It touches everything. We all want to pay for it. Our money goes towards making the network more useful.
The copyright network really has very few players interested in preserving and expanding it but we all pay for it.
> when the nations of the world send their U.N. missions to Geneva, they send water experts, not copyright experts. They send health experts, not copyright experts. They send agriculture experts, not copyright experts, because copyright is just not as important.
But it consumes the same budget. We have finite resources, finite expertise and finite moving hands. It means people are dying, health is declining, agriculture is hindered, water is polluted etc
Meanwhile youtube is deleting just about everything. 3 strikes and everything you've ever published there is gone. Knowledge is lost. We don't know what impact it has but it is safe to assume stuff wont be what it should have been if the maker cant see videos important to his task.
More obvious it gets with scientific publications that cite lists of papers and books that are no longer available.
We need a new network to make sure people get paid for the useful things they make. It can simply be paid for in advance. It's not a challenge.
coming up with the network is not the challenge. hasn't been since www. the challenge is making the right incentives and popular adoption of the network.
Just shut it down. As the monstrosity won so many small fights it counts many components that we can remove one by one until the entire chain of parasitic entities is gone. If anything of value is lost we create solutions for those few things specifically. Since many depend on the income we will have to gradually tune it down.
We can make donations, one can do crowd sourcing and we can create funds that assign budgets by committee. That profits wont randomly grow madly out of proportion with the work is not a bug but a feature.
Roberts space industry suggests we are missing out in a huge way. First people were willing to fold over large sums of money for a game that was not made(!?) Then people were willing to fold over large sums of money for a game that was incredibly delayed(!???) And now people are actually enjoying being part of the development process(!????) Things are progressing towards a finished product but its so overly ambitious that complex works add up to very little progress. I never would have imagined people would put up with that but in hindsight it seems to make sense.
Computers are a network even without internet. (you can carry floppies) This network does everything. It touches everything. We all want to pay for it. Our money goes towards making the network more useful.
The copyright network really has very few players interested in preserving and expanding it but we all pay for it.
> when the nations of the world send their U.N. missions to Geneva, they send water experts, not copyright experts. They send health experts, not copyright experts. They send agriculture experts, not copyright experts, because copyright is just not as important.
But it consumes the same budget. We have finite resources, finite expertise and finite moving hands. It means people are dying, health is declining, agriculture is hindered, water is polluted etc
Meanwhile youtube is deleting just about everything. 3 strikes and everything you've ever published there is gone. Knowledge is lost. We don't know what impact it has but it is safe to assume stuff wont be what it should have been if the maker cant see videos important to his task.
More obvious it gets with scientific publications that cite lists of papers and books that are no longer available.
We need a new network to make sure people get paid for the useful things they make. It can simply be paid for in advance. It's not a challenge.