• xam54321@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, that would make sense, the publish delay could even be as short as a month for things like news, as their value comes from them being relevant.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      their value comes from them being relevant

      The news’s value should be to society, though, not shareholders?

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe? We’re talking about a paradigm shift in copyright at a time where it’s harder and harder for traditional journalism to survive. I fear if we take such hardline stances on whether or not this information is freely accessible, we will lose it outright. Propaganda is always free. The truth has costs.

        • ripcord@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right, the whole original point of copyright in the US at all was “to promote the creative arts” - that they were finding that if there wasn’t at least SOME time for people to try to profit off of stuff they wrote/made, there was way way less motivation for people to put in the effort. It’s been twisted a good bit since, but the core idea isn’t nonsense, at all.

          Same with real journalism. Don’t see how people expect it to be done for free. For the past several hundred years it’s been normal to pay a modest fee for news.