14 ms·
"It is in the public interest to have works move into the public domain, so that others can build upon them" Could offer some examples of "building upon" other
by ShabbyDoo 16y ago
"It is in the public interest to have works move into the public domain, so that others can build upon them"
Could offer some examples of "building upon" others' works which are not allowed without permission under current copyright law? I would like to understand what we as a society might be missing out on.
More generally, I become concerned when I hear "public interest" arguments because they usually apply a relatively static analysis of benefit rather than a dynamic economic model. It might be deemed in the public interest for pizza parlors to be forced by law to provide free pizzas. In the short term, we can imagine all the happiness these pizzas would provide. However, in the slightly longer term, it is obvious that there would be no pizza parlors at all. How does one show that limiting copyright would not have the longer-term effect of fewer works being created?
- jbri 16y agoWe can get some idea by looking at the vast body of works created when copyright was significantly limited compared to today. While there may be a handful of "artists" who wouldn't end up creating works if they could only profit from them for thirty years instead of a hundred, that is likely insignificant compared to the new works created by building on prior efforts.
- flawawa2 16y agoArt is created because people feel the need. Money should not be the incentive. An example could be a fan-made translation of old works. Mashups. Redubbing of movies. Free recordings of music.