Molotov Man

I read a book called Accelerando in a science fiction class with nick laudadio a few semesters ago. From a literary standpoint I can't say that it was that great. But the ideas were amazing. It was such good sci fi. The shock was in the revelation of the future, but it was special from other sci fi because it seemed just around the corner. It started in the 2010s with very realistic advancements: headset computer's that followed eye movement as input etc. Then it started getting exponentially more intense yet it merely followed our current rate of computer advancement based on more's law. It was mind blowing how different things could become as computers gain the bandwidth and power to replicate minds. The point of all this is that at the rate of change that we are all so used to I think it is completely plausible that copyright is going to completely change or go away. Well, that wasn't such a big point. Maybe I can connect this better in the next paragraph.
Copyright is designed to protect creative endeavor, but it merely protects creative endeavor as a means to make money.(?) The wording needs to be changed in the law because it's clear that there are examples on both sides of the fence that are convincing. No, noone should be able to claim your work as their own and noone should be able to make money from it without restitution, but then again appropriation is necessary to take account of. A conundrum. There are caveats about artistic appropriation education etc, but it doesn't seem to stick. Lawsuits still seem to happen over infuriating things. The molotov man for instance....

I started this thinking I was just going to rant against copyright but now I'm seeing both sides. I guess Susan M@%(^(*&^ has some good points. But... I don't know, my original idea was that if it isn't enforceable, if things are changing more and more and you can just have music vs. paying for it (yay piracy), then old ideas about ownership can just be left behind. But thats very utopian and naive and whatnot. Anybody SHOULD be able to do anything they want and anything they find and anybody can, but then there is an imaginary public sphere with imaginary laws that paper and lawyers define and give the right to cops and whatnot to use force to enforce. Duh, silly rant subject, I'm not enlightenment philosopher with a wig. But that's were my personal take on politics stems from, utopian ideas from reading a lot of orwell and huxley and whatnot, therefore my ideas arent very practical. But I can still download illegally. I am the change I want to see in the world.

thepiratebay.org is a great website where you can download illegally. The great thing is it's not illegal in Sweden, where the website's creators live. They don't care! Sweden is a wierd bastion of freedom. I don't know how they get away with being so awesome. On thepiratebay.org they have letters between them and american (and other) companies trying to sue for copyright infringement. The responses are hilarious for the insolent, arrogant, outright rudeness, the complete disregard for the corporate lawyer's perceived authority, their fatuous expectation of fear and powerlessness. They don't realize the boundaries of their imaginary laws. You can do whatever you want. Hail Satan.

I think I used to write more coherently. I haven't had to write a paper in a while and I think I might fail the upcoming one I have to do. Fuck.