4 ms·

Yeah, it is. It's called public domain. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

• redbeard0x0a 9y ago
  Except public domain only happens 70 years after the authors death (or 95 years after publication when talking about corporate authors). So I could write a good book now, publish it, let it go out of print as of this year, live another 40 years. You wouldn't be able to get a copy of my work from the public domain until the year 2127.
  • Vanit 9y ago
    I know how public domain works. My comment was making light of the OP's ambiguous analogy.
  • Terr_ 9y ago
    > Except public domain only happens Flip it: Public domain happens by default. The problem is that some very powerful lobbyists ensure that the government declares otherwise for ridiculously long (and constantly increasing) periods.
    • stctgion 9y ago
      In 2023 Mickey mouse is due to enter the public domain again so it'll probably increase before then
      • katastic 9y ago
        Probably? More like "guaranteed."
        • regulation_d 9y ago
          The Constitution requires that copyright durations be of a "limited times". At some point, we're going to need to put our collective foot down on this or hope that SCOTUS does.
  • BearGoesChirp 9y ago
    Unless something major changes, public domain will never happen again. Corporations such as Disney will continuously lobby to extend it to cover their older works.
    • wvenable 9y ago
      I'm ok with Disney keeping copyright on their works; I just wish that wasn't tied together with so many other works that have been abandoned by their authors (like old games, books, media, etc).
      • djsumdog 9y ago
        I'm really not. They lobby for special legislation around all their specific works. Mickey Mouse should really be in the public domain by now. They should respect those laws and move on to new trade-markable characters and learn to rebrand themselves. The fact that they are so big that they can be granted special exemption is pretty alarming.
        • delinka 9y ago
          It seems you’re conflating trademark and copyright. Personally, I’m fine with trademarks continuing in perpetuity as long as the owner maintains the registration. Disney gets to keep their brand name and trademarked characters. It’s copyright on Disney’s films and music that’s the problem. Maybe I can’t make my own Mickey film, but I could certainly remix Steamboat Willie cartoons if they entered the public domain. Or do similar with their music. But it’s really not even about that. If Disney gobbles up all the copyrightable content, maintains copyright forever, then creating something new (but too similar) can put an individual artist in trouble with copyright law. That’s unacceptable.
      • katastic 9y ago
        Except you should realize 99% of Disney's "works" were ripped off of public domain (and expired copyright) works, which they THEN (after making billions) lobbied to have copyright extended so nobody would ever be able to do what they did. It has to be one of the sickest corporate abuses ("anti-consumer, anti-society") in US history.
  • int_19h 9y ago
    Long copyright terms wouldn't be a problem, if we started to treat copyright as property with respect to taxation. There should be some baseline tax, such that you have to invest money to keep it going. Probably after a couple of first years when the tax is zero, to allow authors to get the cash flow going. And then use the collected taxes to fund public non-copyrighted art.
• AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
  Unfortunately for you, the oligarchy disagrees.
• tracker1 9y ago
  Someone suggested that copyright renewal happen closer to original, and that each renewal becomes a factor more expensive than the last time. Lets say you require renewal each decade (with a one year grace period)... The first registration costs $100, the next 1000, then 10000, etc. If a company is literally willing to pay tens of million+ to keep a work out of public domain for more than 60 years, let them. This allows you to get the first 30 years for $11,100 before it gets pricey. Frankly, I like this idea. Get rid of the pretense of public domain as long as a company is willing to pay that much a decade. Maybe just have it 2.5x each decade once you hit 100 million. Also, have a 3-5 year grace period for renewal before it becomes public domain.
  • delecti 9y ago
    I think just the shortened renewal period alone would be worthwhile, even without the exponentially increasing fees. Any truly abandoned media isn't going to have anyone trying to renew it. If Disney wants to charge me $20 for a copy of the 75 year old Bambi, well... at least it's available. The insultingly long term their lobbyists have bought is a valid topic, but a topic for another thread.
    • caf 9y ago
      That's actually not a great example, because Bambi frequently isn't available due to Disney's practice of rotating their back catalogue through the "vault".
  • danbolt 9y ago
    I've had similar thoughts before, and I think that's a really good idea.
  • ChoGGi 9y ago
    That's generous, I'd always thought 1% of revenue every year (and going up another percent year by year). That's with a maximum of thirty years before it goes into the public domain. Keeping something public yet out of the public domain should cost. Personally I just go with anything over seven years is public domain, unless I have a strong urge to support the artist(s).