4 ms·

And then your problem becomes infinite profit for finite work. If you want to talk about things that break economics, its a perpetual money machine. It just cha

by zanny 11y ago

And then your problem becomes infinite profit for finite work. If you want to talk about things that break economics, its a perpetual money machine. It just changes the game to making sure any potentially popular idea in the future must be rigorously defended under copyright forever. You know, like what people do with patents right now, which is also a destructive and horrible IP mess all on its own.

meric 11y ago
If we have to choose between giving Disney the exclusive right to a perpetual money machine, or to give all copyright owners the same, because Disney is so ingrained into the governing oligarchy, then I think the former choice would be better for society overall.
- ZenPsycho 11y ago
  Indeed, the choice seems to be give Disney a perpetual money machine, vs. give Disney a perpetual money machine AND wreck the public domain.
- jdeisenberg 11y ago
  From what I understand, giving Disney an exception would be a violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.
  - ZenPsycho 11y ago
    It wouldn't need to necessarily be an exception, but it could be, as suggested elsewhere in the thread, an appropriate property tax... If this stuff is indeed "intellectual property" then it should have property taxes. People who don't pay the tax can involuntarily donate to the public domain after the previous reasonable term of say, 56 years after creation.
- lhopki01 11y ago
  Interestingly enough Peter Pan has a perpetual copyright in the UK. All proceeds goes to Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital. There's a special Act of Parliament for it it.
eru 11y ago
> And then your problem becomes infinite profit for finite work. If you want to talk about things that break economics, its a perpetual money machine. Have you heard of discounting and present value calculations? Even an infinite stream of (say constant) income is worth only a finite amount in the present.

by zanny 11y ago

meric 11y ago

If we have to choose between giving Disney the exclusive right to a perpetual money machine, or to give all copyright owners the same, because Disney is so ingrained into the governing oligarchy, then I think the former choice would be better for society overall.

ZenPsycho 11y ago
Indeed, the choice seems to be give Disney a perpetual money machine, vs. give Disney a perpetual money machine AND wreck the public domain.
jdeisenberg 11y ago
From what I understand, giving Disney an exception would be a violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.
- ZenPsycho 11y ago
  It wouldn't need to necessarily be an exception, but it could be, as suggested elsewhere in the thread, an appropriate property tax... If this stuff is indeed "intellectual property" then it should have property taxes. People who don't pay the tax can involuntarily donate to the public domain after the previous reasonable term of say, 56 years after creation.
lhopki01 11y ago
Interestingly enough Peter Pan has a perpetual copyright in the UK. All proceeds goes to Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital. There's a special Act of Parliament for it it.

eru 11y ago

> And then your problem becomes infinite profit for finite work. If you want to talk about things that break economics, its a perpetual money machine. Have you heard of discounting and present value calculations? Even an infinite stream of (say constant) income is worth only a finite amount in the present.