The regulatory and legal system is mostly reactionary. Eventually someone will be sued or sue one of the services about it and it will be settled and become precedent. Which way is hard to say, but I can definitely see your argument being persuasive.

[–] Pips@lemmy.film 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The problem is essentially how do you define ownership? Is there a right to not make something the copyright holder owns publicly available?

I think in the cases of abandonware or more recently the moves by media companies to delist certain media for tax benefits, there's a good argument to be made over forfeiting the copyright, so it's now public domain and fair game. But I also think for something like the Star Wars Holiday Special, where the creator/copyright holder (not sure about that status post-Disney acquisition) genuinely hates it and does not want it available to the public, the owner should be allowed to restrict access to it.

[–] Syrc@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

But I also think for something like the Star Wars Holiday Special, where the creator/copyright holder (not sure about that status post-Disney acquisition) genuinely hates it and does not want it available to the public, the owner should be allowed to restrict access to it.

Personally I disagree on that too. If something has been made public once it should stay public, unless it contains actively harmful information or something.

[–] cccc@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

How do you get tax benefits for that? Sounds pretty shady.