4 ms·

Is there any indication that this has an overall limit of 95 years as per the U.S. Copyright? ("Copyright protection for works published prior to January 1, 197

Is there any indication that this has an overall limit of 95 years as per the U.S. Copyright? ("Copyright protection for works published prior to January 1, 1978, was increased by 20 years to a total of 95 years from their publication date."[0])? This cannot be stressed enough, that the real losers here aren't people who want to remix ultra-famous copyrighted works-- it's that works that nobody cares to profit upon will remain orphaned. If there is one protection to the Public Domain that needs to take place, it's that copyright owners should have to show a willingness to profit off their material (by paying a recurring fee) so we don't experience this deadweight loss. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

greglindahl 11y ago
The general rule is that copyright terms are never reduced. Some of the countries in TPP signed up for the Berne convention before 1978, which means that the US method would reduce the length of some copyrights.
bufordsharkley 11y ago
More on Orphaned Works: "Significant among those changes were the elimination of the registration and notice requirements, which resulted in less accurate and incomplete identifying information on works, and the automatic renewal of copyrighted works that were registered before the effective date of the 1976 Copyright Act." [0] Bringing back registration and ending automatic renewals would do a lot of good. (Adding a fee would be better.) Has there been any work on laws to do this? [0] http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf
- eigenman 11y ago
  The problem is the Berne convention explicitly forbids requiring registration for a work to enjoy the benefits of copyright. The USA ratified this convention in 1989. However, I agree with you. There needs to be some mechanism pushing back on copyright holders encouraging them to let their works revert to the public domain. A nominal fee at regular intervals would go a long way to encouraging this. However, perhaps something more aggressive is needed. Since the advocates of increased copyright duration often phrase their argument in terms of "intellectual property", perhaps a copyright property tax would be more appropriate. "OK Disney, you can keep the mouse out of the public domain, but that will be $50M/yr."
  - bufordsharkley 11y ago
    Thanks for this pointer. At this juncture, it certainly seems that the US shouldn't have caved to signing Berne. We made it 100 years, why didn't we stick it out? Well, commendations to Zoe Lofgren (representing San Jose) at attempting to renew U.S. copyright formalities. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_formalities#Renewed_interest_in_formalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_formalities#Renewed_... EDIT: It appears she hasn't pushed ahead copyright formalities (in the form of the Eldred Act) much since 2005. Here's hoping something new comes up...
snowwrestler 11y ago
Copyright protection does more than generate profit. For example copyright provides the teeth for the GPL, and the various CC license requirements. In general, I think the concept of tying copyright explicitly to profit and fees could produce a pretty strong chilling effect on hobby projects and other free culture. I'd prefer to see some sort of safe harbor defined for people to archive orphaned works, or otherwise keep track of them. Active copyright holders could opt out of the safe harbor on a regular basis via some centralized process akin to registration. If their opt-out lapses, the safe harbor returns. The difference is that the safe harbor would be narrowly defined to permit archiving, but not free distribution or reuse. That way a community can keep track of things, but there is no radical shift in the protections that rest on copyright.

greglindahl 11y ago

The general rule is that copyright terms are never reduced. Some of the countries in TPP signed up for the Berne convention before 1978, which means that the US method would reduce the length of some copyrights.

bufordsharkley 11y ago

More on Orphaned Works: "Significant among those changes were the elimination of the registration and notice requirements, which resulted in less accurate and incomplete identifying information on works, and the automatic renewal of copyrighted works that were registered before the effective date of the 1976 Copyright Act." [0] Bringing back registration and ending automatic renewals would do a lot of good. (Adding a fee would be better.) Has there been any work on laws to do this? [0] http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf

eigenman 11y ago
The problem is the Berne convention explicitly forbids requiring registration for a work to enjoy the benefits of copyright. The USA ratified this convention in 1989. However, I agree with you. There needs to be some mechanism pushing back on copyright holders encouraging them to let their works revert to the public domain. A nominal fee at regular intervals would go a long way to encouraging this. However, perhaps something more aggressive is needed. Since the advocates of increased copyright duration often phrase their argument in terms of "intellectual property", perhaps a copyright property tax would be more appropriate. "OK Disney, you can keep the mouse out of the public domain, but that will be $50M/yr."
- bufordsharkley 11y ago
  Thanks for this pointer. At this juncture, it certainly seems that the US shouldn't have caved to signing Berne. We made it 100 years, why didn't we stick it out? Well, commendations to Zoe Lofgren (representing San Jose) at attempting to renew U.S. copyright formalities. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_formalities#Renewed_interest_in_formalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_formalities#Renewed_... EDIT: It appears she hasn't pushed ahead copyright formalities (in the form of the Eldred Act) much since 2005. Here's hoping something new comes up...

snowwrestler 11y ago

Copyright protection does more than generate profit. For example copyright provides the teeth for the GPL, and the various CC license requirements. In general, I think the concept of tying copyright explicitly to profit and fees could produce a pretty strong chilling effect on hobby projects and other free culture. I'd prefer to see some sort of safe harbor defined for people to archive orphaned works, or otherwise keep track of them. Active copyright holders could opt out of the safe harbor on a regular basis via some centralized process akin to registration. If their opt-out lapses, the safe harbor returns. The difference is that the safe harbor would be narrowly defined to permit archiving, but not free distribution or reuse. That way a community can keep track of things, but there is no radical shift in the protections that rest on copyright.