5 ms·

Does anyone have a link to (or can write) a good explanation of the benefits of things entering the public domain? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it. I think l

Does anyone have a link to (or can write) a good explanation of the benefits of things entering the public domain? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it. I think lobbying to extend copyright terms is disingenuous. But I don't have a great argument for why we should want things to enter the public domain other than "your local theater can show it for free" , which the article noted. People seem to already be sharing things easily enough.

vhold 11y ago
The biggest benefit imo is that derived works can be created freely, imagine if you could use all music up to the 60s or what not freely in any movie or video game you make, or make a game about guessing the movie from scenes from all movies instead of just a tiny subset you had to spend thousands of dollars working with lawyers to negotiate on, etc.
- douche 11y ago
  Then every chain restaurant wouldn't need to have their own, non-infringing Happy Birthday song... One possibly crackpot theory that just occurred to me is that in the _Futurama_ universe, copyright was extended so far as to be perpetual[1] [1] http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ubbd92/futurama-nibbler-s-birthday http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ubbd92/futurama-nibbler-s-birt...
dlubarov 11y ago
One benefit is publishing competition. You can buy most popular public domain novels for $2~$5. On Amazon right now, the first hit for A Modest Proposal (a very short piece) is $2.25, and the first hit for Huckleberry Finn is $4.05. There may be even cheaper options if you dig through the hundreds of other editions. And of course you can get digital copies from sites like Project Gutenberg.
exodust 11y ago
Access, cost, creative interpretation, republishing, sampling, copying, using, showing, legally sharing, downloading, use in the classroom, commercial use without permission... The list goes on. As the article says, public domain breaths new life into forgotten works. It's culturally important to lift the access and publishing restrictions of old works that we learn from and reflect on where we came from. Historical art is important to celebrate, rediscover, republish and enjoy without fear of copyright takedowns by faceless corporate stooges looking to line their pockets.
JustSomeNobody 11y ago
So that the less fortunate will always have access to wonderful works.
andersonvom 11y ago
One very good reason can be seen today: after some of the books from the Sherlock Holmes series went into public domain, artists today are free to use and create derivative works based on/off of them. Case in point: "Elementary" [1] is a Sherlock Holmes series where both Moriarty and Watson are women, Sherlock Holmes lives in NY and he doesn't get along with Inspector Lestrade. If things never fall into public domain, doing something like this can be either very expensive (e.g. paying royalties) or plain impossible (e.g. the author simply doesn't allow it). Copyright laws were meant to incentivize authors to create more, but no amount of incentives will make Sir Arthur Conan Doyle create more interesting stories, about Sherlock Holmes or otherwise. [1]: http://thetvdb.com/?tab=series&id=255316 http://thetvdb.com/?tab=series&id=255316
- Turbo_hedgehog 11y ago
  Sherlock Holmes is interesting - some new characters created by Doyle in the 1920s are not yet in the public domain and thus must be licensed from his estate if you want to use those characters.
mathetic 11y ago
There is a four part documentary (40ish minutes in total) by Kirby Ferguson called "Everything is Remix." [0] It discusses patents in addition to copyright as well. It highlights in numerous ways why public domain is essential for creative process. But it boils down to this: there is nothing new under the sun and the spirit of the copyright law is "to promote the progress of science and useful arts," as written in the constitution. The current abuse of copyright law causes the exact opposite. [0] https://vimeo.com/14912890 https://vimeo.com/14912890
- samueloph 11y ago
  Here's the remastered release https://vimeo.com/139094998 https://vimeo.com/139094998
gabemart 11y ago
I think there's a moral argument that people are entitled to engage in their own culture as they see fit. We accept some limits on this right so that creative people can earn a living, but fundamentally, people have a right to the stories and images that shape their lives and the lives of people around them. If the works of Shakespeare were still under copyright and still controlled by some distant descendants, and those people decided to disallow any new adaptations or printings of his work, it wouldn't just be unfortunate; it would be unjust. The works of Shakespeare now make up a part of our shared human experience, part of our understanding of the human condition, part of our lens for viewing the world. The were created by one person, but now they have been merged into the common culture it is unjust and undesirable for them to be controlled by any one person.
chrismcb 11y ago
Do you like music? Most music today is influenced by classical music. In some cases the influence is more than copyright would allow. Personally I've enjoyed a lot of Disney Classics that are repurposed tales. A big issue we have today in the computer world is "abondonware" where the companies are no longer in business and no one knows who owns the copyright. Sometimes even when you know who the players in the original work, you can't get them to agree on who owns the IP.

vhold 11y ago

The biggest benefit imo is that derived works can be created freely, imagine if you could use all music up to the 60s or what not freely in any movie or video game you make, or make a game about guessing the movie from scenes from all movies instead of just a tiny subset you had to spend thousands of dollars working with lawyers to negotiate on, etc.

douche 11y ago
Then every chain restaurant wouldn't need to have their own, non-infringing Happy Birthday song... One possibly crackpot theory that just occurred to me is that in the _Futurama_ universe, copyright was extended so far as to be perpetual[1] [1] http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ubbd92/futurama-nibbler-s-birthday http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ubbd92/futurama-nibbler-s-birt...

dlubarov 11y ago

One benefit is publishing competition. You can buy most popular public domain novels for $2~$5. On Amazon right now, the first hit for A Modest Proposal (a very short piece) is $2.25, and the first hit for Huckleberry Finn is $4.05. There may be even cheaper options if you dig through the hundreds of other editions. And of course you can get digital copies from sites like Project Gutenberg.

exodust 11y ago

Access, cost, creative interpretation, republishing, sampling, copying, using, showing, legally sharing, downloading, use in the classroom, commercial use without permission... The list goes on. As the article says, public domain breaths new life into forgotten works. It's culturally important to lift the access and publishing restrictions of old works that we learn from and reflect on where we came from. Historical art is important to celebrate, rediscover, republish and enjoy without fear of copyright takedowns by faceless corporate stooges looking to line their pockets.

JustSomeNobody 11y ago

So that the less fortunate will always have access to wonderful works.

andersonvom 11y ago

One very good reason can be seen today: after some of the books from the Sherlock Holmes series went into public domain, artists today are free to use and create derivative works based on/off of them. Case in point: "Elementary" [1] is a Sherlock Holmes series where both Moriarty and Watson are women, Sherlock Holmes lives in NY and he doesn't get along with Inspector Lestrade. If things never fall into public domain, doing something like this can be either very expensive (e.g. paying royalties) or plain impossible (e.g. the author simply doesn't allow it). Copyright laws were meant to incentivize authors to create more, but no amount of incentives will make Sir Arthur Conan Doyle create more interesting stories, about Sherlock Holmes or otherwise. [1]: http://thetvdb.com/?tab=series&id=255316 http://thetvdb.com/?tab=series&id=255316

Turbo_hedgehog 11y ago
Sherlock Holmes is interesting - some new characters created by Doyle in the 1920s are not yet in the public domain and thus must be licensed from his estate if you want to use those characters.

mathetic 11y ago

There is a four part documentary (40ish minutes in total) by Kirby Ferguson called "Everything is Remix." [0] It discusses patents in addition to copyright as well. It highlights in numerous ways why public domain is essential for creative process. But it boils down to this: there is nothing new under the sun and the spirit of the copyright law is "to promote the progress of science and useful arts," as written in the constitution. The current abuse of copyright law causes the exact opposite. [0] https://vimeo.com/14912890 https://vimeo.com/14912890

samueloph 11y ago
Here's the remastered release https://vimeo.com/139094998 https://vimeo.com/139094998

gabemart 11y ago

I think there's a moral argument that people are entitled to engage in their own culture as they see fit. We accept some limits on this right so that creative people can earn a living, but fundamentally, people have a right to the stories and images that shape their lives and the lives of people around them. If the works of Shakespeare were still under copyright and still controlled by some distant descendants, and those people decided to disallow any new adaptations or printings of his work, it wouldn't just be unfortunate; it would be unjust. The works of Shakespeare now make up a part of our shared human experience, part of our understanding of the human condition, part of our lens for viewing the world. The were created by one person, but now they have been merged into the common culture it is unjust and undesirable for them to be controlled by any one person.

chrismcb 11y ago

Do you like music? Most music today is influenced by classical music. In some cases the influence is more than copyright would allow. Personally I've enjoyed a lot of Disney Classics that are repurposed tales. A big issue we have today in the computer world is "abondonware" where the companies are no longer in business and no one knows who owns the copyright. Sometimes even when you know who the players in the original work, you can't get them to agree on who owns the IP.