In the fourteenth century, the first movable type made of wood, being in the fifteenth century when the change is made to the types of lead. Previously, from the V century in China, already used wooden wedges.
In the fifteenth century, the process of copying a book into the hands of a copyist could take up to 10 years. However, with the recent invention of the types of lead time was reduced copy of a book until several weeks or months.
In the nineteenth century automates the production of texts with the linotype machine through a keyboard composed automatically lead type in the box.
Later in the decade of 1980, displayed the first machines that perform electronic typesetting, typesetting born. This decade will be the beginning of a silent revolution in society.
In the 1990's personal computers desktop publishing once again revolutionize the printing press.
All these changes were accompanied by large changes in the printing system, image processing and paper.
And we got to the end of the twentieth century, the Internet appears in the world.
In each of the developments of the printing press the improvement process progressively decreases the production time printed copies. Thus, the product reached more hands and their cost (in time) was reduced.
If we consider that culture is the memory of mankind, with each invention or process that has improved the transfer of information from one time to her after that culture is getting to be more agile, that memory was more accurate, and his legacy reached more people. The fact that the culture will become increasingly an intangible asset in the hands of more people is causing the population to getting the release of her psyche against the established power. Free culture to the individual.
Today there is no person capable of performing any mechanical or artistic work without achieving a knowledge society. We all receive the culture hands of our parents and society, both through education and connections with other people both directly and through the media.
All connections people make an impact on global culture, they strengthen the evolving global culture and the cultural significance of reality. All we change the culture.
The process of cultural production through the press (as a source of cultural transmission) has been developed even though the authorities, governments, religion, constantly tried to bring culture to their interests, with the sole purpose of control the thinking of all people. Control information is control the culture, and thus control the future. But if there is anything more dangerous than control the future is to park, stop, break, destroy the culture in the present. Through the control and censorship of culture in the present is able to restrain the cultural evolution, ultimately, it destroys the freedom of thought and objectivity is sacrificed people. This manages to keep social control and social control is behind the economic control. Who is most interested in getting the economic control of a company? I will leave this question for everyone to take sides: ·)
Printing, the unknown monster. In the fifteenth century the printing press began to flourish. Magnificent. The copyists were left in oblivion. Five centuries ago, have ceased to exist copyists, the world evolves and improves. In the nineteenth century appears the linotype, mobile rates are for small applications within the printing press, large quantities of books are converted into corporations that are dedicated to pass the text in large boxes of lead. The printers are disappearing in many components involved in the case manually create the pages of books, newspapers and magazines. Disappeared a century ago most of the teachers occupation of compositors. The world evolves and improves. In the 1980 photo-appears, the speed with which the computer performs the same job with the linotype is considerable and allows reuse of what worked, saving documents and their correction, and of course, does not use lead, the galleys of books and magazines come directly photo paper ready for direct mounting on the photomechanical. Disappeared 30 years ago the office of typesetter. The world evolves and improves. In the 1990's at stake personal computers, desktop publishing, anyone can make your book at home, the texts come to printers without going through the typesetting. Disappeared 20 years ago the office of imagesetters. The world evolves and improves. We
in 2010, in the last 20 years the press has seen all his offices have disappeared. Everything has been part of a cultural process of improvement. Society evolves and improves.
We are now in the Internet age, information is transmitted by the networks no longer need to communicate print culture. Culture is generated in networks and distributed networks. The culture is free, and as such acts freely. People have free access to information they generate.
It's time to see the death of print. But this last gasp is not anything.
Behind the press is the control of culture, government, religion and mass media are not willing to lose your business. But not only business, but the control of culture, population control. Let the power of censorship is not something clumsy on their minds.
To do this they must win the war, although they know that the press has its days numbered, as are the record companies and other producers of cultural material physical. In order to win the war will have to use their weapons, but weapons are not enough: money, government, religion, are its weapons. But they need to do to load their weapons, souls need to carry their weapons so that they can harm society. They need to find how to inject poison into society. What have I overlooked
up now? The origin, the middle and the end of the culture: people.
All persons are creators of their environment, through its environment are returning to transmit information. There are people who use the environment for economic activity apparently only: bakers, teachers, psychologists, etc.
It is not only an activity like that. Anyone who makes a cultural transformation in your environment.
A baker kneading bread alone night after night, also try new recipes, make changes to old recipes, improvement, adapting to new times, made a cultural change in society.
A teacher reciting a text not only their students day after day, listens to students, review their actions, cultural models to their students, conducted a cultural change in society.
A psychologist just create social change, is not it, or maybe save the life of a person is not a social change? Getting a person's psyche remake is a creation ... Right?
In definition, an author is a creator of new cultural concepts, then, any person serving as co-author of social culture, reinventing and returns to society, thus forming a cycle in which culture is always the benefit.
Based on this, anyone who manages to improve or speed up the evolutionary process of culture is a potential author. But only some people have the ability to significantly improve the process. These people are considered "authors." Develop cultural undertakings and other people and other jobs in all professions there are better and worse, more valued and less, more loved and less. But in all the trades people never cease to be people.
At this should be noted that economic processes are detached from social or cultural processes. Each person brings their knowledge within the cultural processes to generate a social benefit. In this way, through social processes is creating new trends in relationships, and as a result of these economic processes become inviolate culture in an affordable, thereby giving an advantage to each of the participants. However, the benefit in the economic process is directly linked to the need of each person individually to make a profit on their investment in social processes.
Thus we come to the determination that the relationship between the author and the culture is through society, not without it.
This phenomenon (the relation author-society-culture) reveals a purpose in people: we are social beings and cultural. Proof of this is action in all cultures with individuals who attack society both as a group and individually, all cultures excluded society of individuals aggressors. The fault for not being an individual is culturally and socially collaborative exclusion (as a fundamental part of the punishment of other connotations). Such individuals may only be reinstated if they agree to be socially and culturally collaborative again.
At this point I can play that all people are cultural authors, thus keeping everyone on their natural right of society to be regarded as cultural transmitters. By entering a cultural movement in society, it creates an economic process that will validate the survival of the economic movement regardless of the survival of the cultural movement. It is here that misrepresents the conceptualization the author as a being a transgressor of the culture by creating the false image of externalization of the culture within society. Because this is confusing the term "copyright" on "benefits of copyright."
When a person decides to make a profit copyright of their cultural contributions to society establishing an economic relationship with society. It is evident that all people hold the rights to your life and relationships at all levels. It is also clear that the benefits that may generate economic activity will benefit the person who generates. This is important because it is necessary for all people distinguish between their rights and benefits. And benefits can exist or not exist, the rights of individuals are inalienable. While copyright remains forever (does anyone not know who was Miguel de Cervantes? Has he lost the right of being the creator of Don Quixote?), The benefits of copyright can only be achieved as related economic output is used to an economic process within the social movement. However, the cultural movement can go deep into the copyright, generate new streams that both the author and others can be strengthened with new systems. This implies that there is no copyright on the basis of an economic reference, with the company (and therefore the final destination culture) who receives the right Copyright maintaining the power of its owner on its cultural evolution.
In an economic system in which authors are associated with a commercial product falls into the false trap of confusing dialectic rights to benefits. In this way the business process in the author creates a confusion of relationships. In an economic process must be borne in mind that whenever there is a relationship system that connects all points of the process to get the economic movement. In the economic process can distinguish between supplier, customer, consumer and product. The product is the cultural line dependent on the author's previous social relations within society. The supplier is the company due to transmission product to the consumer. The consumer is the person, company or product purchasing process. And finally, the client: the author. The author is the client of culture, also the transmitting client. As we see, copyright is the evolution of a social reception of content.
As I was saying, the author benefits are linked to the economic process. This implies that those cultural processes are not involved in economic processes have no contact with the benefits of copyright. Any cultural movement excluded from the economic movement poses no grievance on behalf of the author or the economic benefit of the transmitters. It also gives the feature that through such cultural movements outside the economic movement generated discussion threads that improve the channels through which the transmitters can have access to contact their customers.
Once the difference between right and benefit of the author see as the social barrier between the author (client of economic processes) and buyer (consumer of economic processes) is dissipated, both participants in the cultural system.
I note the distinction between different cultural segments in which we notice the different behavior of some authors and others in reference to society. These differences are due to cultural alienation in the cost conceptualization of the benefits of copyright. Generally, authors tend to accept without undermining the cultural evolution of their jobs tend to be scientists, developers, legislators, doctors, etc.., Compared to authors who are damaging the cultural evolution of his work as are the writers, musicians, visual artists , etc. As much as each other identical in cultural processes and purposes (social and cultural evolution), the latter perceive share their work as a loss of profit. There never really lost profits in any case, since sharing culture is the only way to evolve culturally and at the same time to receive the necessary culture to generate new cultural movements.
The loss of benefit on the author's work is determined by allowing a third process intervene between the consumer and the author. Addressing a cultural transmitter as an intermediary between authors and consumers, the author becomes a client of the intermediary. However, the intermediary can only cope with the substantial financial investment by giving the impression to the customer (author) is actually the service provider and not the author of a cultural movement. This is because the author loses control over his work at the moment is to multiply indefinitely in order to reach the consumer. In those products that the transmission process generate multiple copies can not indefinitely figure is destroyed and only provider maintain the figure of the author as of culture. Thus, we see as artists (whose works can not cover double) this conceptualization becomes a very different tone, so with plays, and obviously those cultural works (especially scientists) that are developed for a particular purpose. In these cases, the author detaches the figure as a customer of the supplier of transmissions, thus becomes in the same figure the customer and the supplier, thereby eliminating the discussion of the cost of the product since there is only one direct exit to the sale without possibility sales multiplied indefinitely.
As we have seen, copyright has never disappeared from its owner. All cultural references need to maintain the copyright to maintain cultural cohesion and social development. However, the benefit of the author is intimately linked to the economic process. We wrongly, the economic process as the sole champion of the culture. By relying wrongly culture transmitter content created in the author's "Stockholm Syndrome" by believing that without the economic processes of culture loses its benefit. But this is a mistake, and that culture maintains its evolution through shared among all members copyright, to continue evolving society culturally.
In short, the author gets paid the same currency you pay your debt, with copyright, sharing the culture that society has shared with him. Otherwise, the author ends up being the ammunition with which the industry seeks to destroy the culture.
