A Perspective On The Complexities Of Copyright And Creativity From A Victim Of Infringement | Techdirt

Wow, Just Wow... how incredibly insulting.

The Tech Dirt “Case Study” on artist Erin McKeown’s bout with copyright infringement of one of her songs results in an internet bully pile on that defies any rationality.

These comments are so offensive I don’t even know what to say. This is what Tech Dirt and it’s followers think of artists. If there was any previous doubt about what the true agenda of these people is, this pretty much spells it out.


Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2012 @ 4:09pm

Stop the lawsuit now and get to work.

Today I had to get up and go to work to earn my money. I worked back in 2003 also, but nobody is paying me for that work today. Why should they pay you?

Did you contact everyone who inspired your song? Who you copied from? No? So why should you expect them to contact you? All creations are fundamentally derivative; yours is not special.

If a "copy" of your song really is a huge hit and you can't figure out how to monetize that, whose fault is it? Go start working out a tour in Slovakia and wherever else your song and its "copies" are popular. Sell some merch while you're at it. You have a huge opportunity to capitalize, but instead you're conspiring with bloodsucking lawyers to stifle someone else's creativity. The only ones who will win that battle are the lawyers. Your lawsuit is hostile to the very people who might someday pay you: your fans. If they're fans of a "copy," surely they will also be big fans of the original.

You have a secondary advantage many artists do not: you can claim to have been wronged by a big corporation (even though their "copying" of your song is actually huge free publicity). As anyone here at Techdirt can tell you, controversy and righteous indignation can be used to drive sales in a big way. That makes buying an Erin McKeown shirt more than just a fan's purchase: they are now supporting a "cause!"

Don't waste this potential! Get planning!


Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2012 @ 4:18pm

really? you have copyright on the use of weather as metaphor for happiness in a song?

I guess it's all sunshine and roses for you from here on out, because you can just spend the rest of your life suing anyone who uses weather related idioms in a published work.

One of the reasons copyright law is such a mess is that people tend to overgeneralize similarities to the point where they are meaningless.


Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2012 @ 4:35pm

Nope. There is no such thing as "free riding." That's a concept invented by IP maximalists to justify their restriction of other people's natural rights. By even using the term you implicitly support their cause.

I can barely bear to look at this article's title. Infringement "victim?" There is NO victim here, except perhaps the targets of the stated (and frivolous) lawsuit who are victims of attempted censorship.

What was taken from the supposed "victim" here? Nothing. A new song was created. CREATED. Huge potential publicity was created FOR FREE.

Restore sanity. Abolish copyright!


Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2012 @ 6:11pm

I can understand the IP maximalists at least, but this "shades of gray" crap really smacks of appeasement.

This community can usually be counted on to hold the line, but as soon as some girl shows up with a guitar AND A CADRE OF LAWYERS, it's all "oh well consider everyone's feelings" and "shades of gray." Is that hypocrisy or just selling out?

If you are trying to stifle the creativity of people because they succeeded where you failed, if you are suing them or enabling such a lawsuit, or if you are denying the public the maximum benefit of its collective creative output, I think you might need to consider the possibility that you are simply a bad person.