Well, you can try advocating for change. You may fail, but at least you tried. Rather than be cynical and dismissive.
Unfortunately, it isn't that black and white of an issue.
Corporate greed doesn't care about preservation or art. It would be nice if this wasn't the case, but sometimes, taking it while laying down after fighting the good fight doesn't cut it. It's being way too passive and giving them the upper hand. Respectfully, there's a time and a place for respecting copyright law. There's a difference between supporting artists directly (especially if they're independent) because piracy genuinely hurts them, rolling up your sleeves to ensure something doesn't inevitably become lost due to its scarcity, and then what major companies are doing like with the current situation regarding HBO Max.
These people generally have the means to release content and keep it available, but refuse to. There's a difference between having issues with copyright troubles like MTV had when it came to giving Daria a box set release (thus the soundtrack we got in its place was changed) and networks or major studios that are well within their means to make something public and choose not to. As an example, Disney has been notoriously guilty of this when it comes to their original programming and if it wasn't for Disney+, we'd likely never see something like So Weird get a true release. Even now, we still have stuff that's unaccounted for and there's no telling when or if we'll see those again. Whoever managed to record it back when it was in syndication are probably the few people who hold the key to giving us closure.
It's things like this that lead to ABC dumping the majority of DuMont's archives and renders a good amount of television history completely lost because it was too much money to keep it around. There's so much content that would still be presumably lost for good if it wasn't for good faith pirates and "whistleblowers" who leaked said content if it wasn't captured by chance through other means. This results in situations like that of an alleged insider who helped to make much of So Weird's raw soundtrack public after being locked away for 20 years. This leads to previously unknown and unreleased tracks from bands being salvaged because of tape trading by a fan who was at the right place at the right time. This leads to forgotten movies being rediscovered because of bootlegging. Can you imagine how much stuff we'd still have if someone had the forethought to back it up? That doesn't even count the stuff that we don't know about because it wasn't properly documented either, because that's a whole other can of worms.
As an artist myself, I will 100% support artists trying to protect their work because, as I said, sometimes piracy does affect them if they're completely independent and don't make gangbusters on their work. I know artists who have vented about how their low budget passion projects that they've made little from are turning up on foreign torrenting sites - only to get told to suck it up because at least they're getting seen. That's something that does rub me the wrong way. However, inaction hurts artists just as much as well - not just fans and preservationists like us, and the current goings on with animated programs like Infinity Train are a prime example of this and filmmakers whose filmography is incomplete and don't know if it will ever be found. This is when we start talking about personal livelihood being tampered with because of greed and neglifence, as well as the debate about what constitutes civil disobedience and blatant lawbreaking. However, even then, ethics are subjective and where we in the community draw the line has never been truly defined beyond shorthand. I know we try to shy away from talking about it too much for legal reasons, but again, given the nature of our work, I feel we're well within our means to say our job is rooted on civil disobedience - which is not a bad thing.
All of this is to say that there will always be a time and place to discuss ethics in the community. We can be divided on it. That's why we have these discussions where we can talk openly and civil. However, sometimes kind words, polite emails, and petitions don't do jackshit - to be quite frank. If it really worked like that, we wouldn't be at a loss we are with a lot of content. Some people literally do not care if it doesn't stuff their pockets (ie: corporations). Sometimes it's completely out of their hands and they can't do a lot to help us even if they wanted to. After that, sitting with your hands on your lap to just wait for things to change does absolutely nothing to help the cause, because god only knows when that would happen - if it ever will. Then, you're left with wondering what's even left to preserve if it hasn't rotted away. It's fine to not want to risk muddying your hands if that's your concern; be it a guilty conscious or you don't have the means of archiving something. I get that. That's why we're a community and we're fortunate to have people who do have such capabilities and the benefits perpetually outweigh the consequences. There will always be someone who is more than happy to help step up to the plate to help you.
I think I've said enough here and going on would just be redundant. I understand and respect wanting to do things as ethically as possible for the sake of safety and being professional. Unfortunately, we don't have that luxury all the time and we need to decide if we're going to cut our losses and back down from what's worth it for us and what's worth carrying on with.
Well, you can try advocating for change. You may fail, but at least you tried. Rather than be cynical and dismissive.
<snip>
Advocating that the law be changed to permit lost media preservation as an exception to copyright is not mutually exclusive with the points in your essay. It is an additional route that the community could take up.
^ Don't change the goalposts. We only went down this line of argument because you said that we should advocate for a change in laws instead of skirting the law.
Well, you can try advocating for change. You may fail, but at least you tried. Rather than be cynical and dismissive.
Unfortunately, it isn't that black and white of an issue.
Corporate greed doesn't care about preservation or art. It would be nice if this wasn't the case, but sometimes, taking it while laying down after fighting the good fight doesn't cut it. It's being way too passive and giving them the upper hand. Respectfully, there's a time and a place for respecting copyright law. There's a difference between supporting artists directly (especially if they're independent) because piracy genuinely hurts them, rolling up your sleeves to ensure something doesn't inevitably become lost due to its scarcity, and then what major companies are doing like with the current situation regarding HBO Max.
These people generally have the means to release content and keep it available, but refuse to. There's a difference between having issues with copyright troubles like MTV had when it came to giving Daria a box set release (thus the soundtrack we got in its place was changed) and networks or major studios that are well within their means to make something public and choose not to. As an example, Disney has been notoriously guilty of this when it comes to their original programming and if it wasn't for Disney+, we'd likely never see something like So Weird get a true release. Even now, we still have stuff that's unaccounted for and there's no telling when or if we'll see those again. Whoever managed to record it back when it was in syndication are probably the few people who hold the key to giving us closure.
It's things like this that lead to ABC dumping the majority of DuMont's archives and renders a good amount of television history completely lost because it was too much money to keep it around. There's so much content that would still be presumably lost for good if it wasn't for good faith pirates and "whistleblowers" who leaked said content if it wasn't captured by chance through other means. This results in situations like that of an alleged insider who helped to make much of So Weird's raw soundtrack public after being locked away for 20 years. This leads to previously unknown and unreleased tracks from bands being salvaged because of tape trading by a fan who was at the right place at the right time. This leads to forgotten movies being rediscovered because of bootlegging. Can you imagine how much stuff we'd still have if someone had the forethought to back it up? That doesn't even count the stuff that we don't know about because it wasn't properly documented either, because that's a whole other can of worms.
As an artist myself, I will 100% support artists trying to protect their work because, as I said, sometimes piracy does affect them if they're completely independent and don't make gangbusters on their work. I know artists who have vented about how their low budget passion projects that they've made little from are turning up on foreign torrenting sites - only to get told to suck it up because at least they're getting seen. That's something that does rub me the wrong way. However, inaction hurts artists just as much as well - not just fans and preservationists like us, and the current goings on with animated programs like Infinity Train are a prime example of this and filmmakers whose filmography is incomplete and don't know if it will ever be found. This is when we start talking about personal livelihood being tampered with because of greed and neglifence, as well as the debate about what constitutes civil disobedience and blatant lawbreaking. However, even then, ethics are subjective and where we in the community draw the line has never been truly defined beyond shorthand. I know we try to shy away from talking about it too much for legal reasons, but again, given the nature of our work, I feel we're well within our means to say our job is rooted on civil disobedience - which is not a bad thing.
All of this is to say that there will always be a time and place to discuss ethics in the community. We can be divided on it. That's why we have these discussions where we can talk openly and civil. However, sometimes kind words, polite emails, and petitions don't do jackshit - to be quite frank. If it really worked like that, we wouldn't be at a loss we are with a lot of content. Some people literally do not care if it doesn't stuff their pockets (ie: corporations). Sometimes it's completely out of their hands and they can't do a lot to help us even if they wanted to. After that, sitting with your hands on your lap to just wait for things to change does absolutely nothing to help the cause, because god only knows when that would happen - if it ever will. Then, you're left with wondering what's even left to preserve if it hasn't rotted away. It's fine to not want to risk muddying your hands if that's your concern; be it a guilty conscious or you don't have the means of archiving something. I get that. That's why we're a community and we're fortunate to have people who do have such capabilities and the benefits perpetually outweigh the consequences. There will always be someone who is more than happy to help step up to the plate to help you.
I think I've said enough here and going on would just be redundant. I understand and respect wanting to do things as ethically as possible for the sake of safety and being professional. Unfortunately, we don't have that luxury all the time and we need to decide if we're going to cut our losses and back down from what's worth it for us and what's worth carrying on with.
What you've said about carless corporations is more true than ever considering Coyote v. Acme's situation right now.
Dreams are boundless, imaginations are infinite, space is a multi-directional spiral & Akazukin ChaCha is my favorite anime
Unfortunately, it isn't that black and white of an issue.
Corporate greed doesn't care about preservation or art. It would be nice if this wasn't the case, but sometimes, taking it while laying down after fighting the good fight doesn't cut it. It's being way too passive and giving them the upper hand. Respectfully, there's a time and a place for respecting copyright law. There's a difference between supporting artists directly (especially if they're independent) because piracy genuinely hurts them, rolling up your sleeves to ensure something doesn't inevitably become lost due to its scarcity, and then what major companies are doing like with the current situation regarding HBO Max.
These people generally have the means to release content and keep it available, but refuse to. There's a difference between having issues with copyright troubles like MTV had when it came to giving Daria a box set release (thus the soundtrack we got in its place was changed) and networks or major studios that are well within their means to make something public and choose not to. As an example, Disney has been notoriously guilty of this when it comes to their original programming and if it wasn't for Disney+, we'd likely never see something like So Weird get a true release. Even now, we still have stuff that's unaccounted for and there's no telling when or if we'll see those again. Whoever managed to record it back when it was in syndication are probably the few people who hold the key to giving us closure.
It's things like this that lead to ABC dumping the majority of DuMont's archives and renders a good amount of television history completely lost because it was too much money to keep it around. There's so much content that would still be presumably lost for good if it wasn't for good faith pirates and "whistleblowers" who leaked said content if it wasn't captured by chance through other means. This results in situations like that of an alleged insider who helped to make much of So Weird's raw soundtrack public after being locked away for 20 years. This leads to previously unknown and unreleased tracks from bands being salvaged because of tape trading by a fan who was at the right place at the right time. This leads to forgotten movies being rediscovered because of bootlegging. Can you imagine how much stuff we'd still have if someone had the forethought to back it up? That doesn't even count the stuff that we don't know about because it wasn't properly documented either, because that's a whole other can of worms.
As an artist myself, I will 100% support artists trying to protect their work because, as I said, sometimes piracy does affect them if they're completely independent and don't make gangbusters on their work. I know artists who have vented about how their low budget passion projects that they've made little from are turning up on foreign torrenting sites - only to get told to suck it up because at least they're getting seen. That's something that does rub me the wrong way. However, inaction hurts artists just as much as well - not just fans and preservationists like us, and the current goings on with animated programs like Infinity Train are a prime example of this and filmmakers whose filmography is incomplete and don't know if it will ever be found. This is when we start talking about personal livelihood being tampered with because of greed and neglifence, as well as the debate about what constitutes civil disobedience and blatant lawbreaking. However, even then, ethics are subjective and where we in the community draw the line has never been truly defined beyond shorthand. I know we try to shy away from talking about it too much for legal reasons, but again, given the nature of our work, I feel we're well within our means to say our job is rooted on civil disobedience - which is not a bad thing.
All of this is to say that there will always be a time and place to discuss ethics in the community. We can be divided on it. That's why we have these discussions where we can talk openly and civil. However, sometimes kind words, polite emails, and petitions don't do jackshit - to be quite frank. If it really worked like that, we wouldn't be at a loss we are with a lot of content. Some people literally do not care if it doesn't stuff their pockets (ie: corporations). Sometimes it's completely out of their hands and they can't do a lot to help us even if they wanted to. After that, sitting with your hands on your lap to just wait for things to change does absolutely nothing to help the cause, because god only knows when that would happen - if it ever will. Then, you're left with wondering what's even left to preserve if it hasn't rotted away. It's fine to not want to risk muddying your hands if that's your concern; be it a guilty conscious or you don't have the means of archiving something. I get that. That's why we're a community and we're fortunate to have people who do have such capabilities and the benefits perpetually outweigh the consequences. There will always be someone who is more than happy to help step up to the plate to help you.
I think I've said enough here and going on would just be redundant. I understand and respect wanting to do things as ethically as possible for the sake of safety and being professional. Unfortunately, we don't have that luxury all the time and we need to decide if we're going to cut our losses and back down from what's worth it for us and what's worth carrying on with.
What you've said about carless corporations is more true than ever considering Coyote v. Acme's situation right now.
That's what I was thinking when I saw this notification again and how not much has or will ever change.
More illustration of the issues on intellectual property rights and music publishing rights (copyright) and ownership of the physical tapes containing the music:
