A big bucket of copyright and it's murky depths. |
Of course, I've seen hbomberguys new video. 3:50 hour documentary. The way he covers how the angry video nerd became a content farm, and how the internet historian hidden past and how he built his audience over trolls. Pass on that audience.
So it's better to create something with honest, professional practice including the marketing. Those samples within the documentary aren't the case. All these determined streams of attention, all will pass, it's better to build something ourselves.
To quote a direct marketer Herschal Gordon Lewis which the ones who plagiarize ignored:
"Lying isn't necessary If it ever becomes Necessary, Let's all do something else for a living."
- Copyright/trademark is always the most fluid law, ostensibly it's meant to protect the specific expression. Yet it's been abused by big business to cripple freelancing/small scale business. It's a paradoxical law where it can't be applied selectively; it's universal. Otherwise, it won't work.
- I could establish further enforcement, yet at the same time that'd give big business a means to cripple. Then that's a no-go. No artificial DMCA takedowns, please! We've seen what happens when the music industry does it for streams. Is Hbomberguy right in this categorization? (Edit: bomberguy did hint at this at the start of plagiarism detection, so points there.)
Now that, I'll know there'll be natty or not when it comes to my own work.
Appendix:
What I've said about copyright. Seth has covered it within his podcasts, I generally agree. Especially as he's covered the part that's covered with Harlen Elison's rant of paying the writer. I have to quote him, because this blog is a yoink and twist of his format.