4 ms·

But how will we incentivize Dr. Seuss or Gene Roddenberry to create new works if we don't "protect" their current works? /s (Don't even get me started about co

But how will we incentivize Dr. Seuss or Gene Roddenberry to create new works if we don't "protect" their current works? /s (Don't even get me started about companies whose entire business is built on "monetizing" the public domain and locking it in a "vault"... >sigh<) Edit: I'm not anti-copyright. Egregious length of copyright term is my main beef. I think limited time monopolies (patents and copyrights) can produce a lot of good for society. The contract has to be favorable to both parties, though. Letting those who "own" items of "intellectual property" starve the public domain for too long, particularly when so many works end up being orphaned (and effectively unusable for anyone), is what I have a problem with. Right now the contract for copyright is too stilted in favor of the "owners", to my mind.

floatingatoll 6y ago
Would you consider this an acceptable first step? It is clearly a compromise, as it does not attempt to reform 'sale of rights' nor does it place works into the public domain until fifty years after they're created, but it explicitly neutralizes the ability to perpetuate and renew copyright through inheritance, transfer, or inclusion wrapping, while protecting against hacks such as modifying the law (as Disney likes to do), since those modifications could only affect future works, per the immunity clause. "When this law takes effect, the following terms are irreversibly assigned to all past and future copyrights, and in case of contradictions, these terms have ultimate precedence over all past and future declarations: Copyrighted works enter the public domain in the sooner of ten years after the death of all persons identified as creators of the work, fifty years after the creation of the work, and fifty years after the registration of the work; those works where no persons are registered as the creators shall enter the public domain in the sooner of ten years after the dissolution of non-person entities registered as the creator, thirty years after the creation of the work, and thirty years after the registration of the work."
- nitrogen 6y ago
  fifty years after the creation of the work, and fifty years after the registration of the work Is it possible to register a copyright before the work is created? ten years after the death of all persons identified as creators of the work Probably don't want this part. Murder for hire to reduce copyright terms by 40 years?
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    The entire "life of the author" thing is ridiculous. So you get a longer copyright for something you write when you're 20 than something you write when you're 70? Why? Are we trying to reduce the relative incentive for more experienced authors to continue writing? Just make it 50 years.
    - floatingatoll 6y ago
      Sure, I am persuaded, and it's much simpler that way, too. Works for me! I release it into the public domain :) I just wrote this in a few minutes during dinner so I'm not heavily invested in it or anything. It's just a way to learn more about the person I'm responding to. Easier to ask a question about a tangible than an imaginary and all that.
    - mjevans 6y ago
      It should be the speed of culture progressing. I'd be happier with something like 10 years, and paying exponentially increasing fees to renew it past that mark in exchange for keeping culture locked up. Trademarks? That's a consumer protection service and for a small percent of profits on marked items plus a flat fee should be allowed.
      - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        > It should be the speed of culture progressing. I'd be happier with something like 10 years, and paying exponentially increasing fees to renew it past that mark in exchange for keeping culture locked up. The exponentially increasing cost works well. Start off at a $10 registration for ten years, then multiply by 10 for each subsequent ten year registration. You want to renew that 120 year old copyright on an individual work? No problem, that'll be ten trillion dollars for the next ten years, see you in ten years when it's a hundred trillion. Meanwhile 90% of everything enters the public domain inside of twenty years because it's not worth paying a thousand bucks for another ten. > Trademarks? That's a consumer protection service and for a small percent of profits on marked items plus a flat fee should be allowed. Trademarks are fine the way they are. Nobody is complaining about the term of trademarks, which is as long as you're actually using it. It would actually be better if copyright required that -- so that if you want to retain a copyright it can't be out of print for more than ten years.
- CodesInChaos 6y ago
  I'd go with something like "30 years after publication or 30+5 years after creation whichever is earlier". (Duration to be bikeshed) The "after publication" part is the common case and easy to handle this publication dates are easy to figure out. The "after creation" part is a fallback in case works are discovered long a after their creation. I don't like basing it on the Author's lifetime, it feels both unfair and complicates the rule significantly.
TeeMassive 6y ago
In French, copyright is called "author's rights". When I hear that copyright endures 70 years after death... well it's not longer the author's right

floatingatoll 6y ago

Would you consider this an acceptable first step? It is clearly a compromise, as it does not attempt to reform 'sale of rights' nor does it place works into the public domain until fifty years after they're created, but it explicitly neutralizes the ability to perpetuate and renew copyright through inheritance, transfer, or inclusion wrapping, while protecting against hacks such as modifying the law (as Disney likes to do), since those modifications could only affect future works, per the immunity clause. "When this law takes effect, the following terms are irreversibly assigned to all past and future copyrights, and in case of contradictions, these terms have ultimate precedence over all past and future declarations: Copyrighted works enter the public domain in the sooner of ten years after the death of all persons identified as creators of the work, fifty years after the creation of the work, and fifty years after the registration of the work; those works where no persons are registered as the creators shall enter the public domain in the sooner of ten years after the dissolution of non-person entities registered as the creator, thirty years after the creation of the work, and thirty years after the registration of the work."

nitrogen 6y ago
fifty years after the creation of the work, and fifty years after the registration of the work Is it possible to register a copyright before the work is created? ten years after the death of all persons identified as creators of the work Probably don't want this part. Murder for hire to reduce copyright terms by 40 years?
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  The entire "life of the author" thing is ridiculous. So you get a longer copyright for something you write when you're 20 than something you write when you're 70? Why? Are we trying to reduce the relative incentive for more experienced authors to continue writing? Just make it 50 years.
  - floatingatoll 6y ago
    Sure, I am persuaded, and it's much simpler that way, too. Works for me! I release it into the public domain :) I just wrote this in a few minutes during dinner so I'm not heavily invested in it or anything. It's just a way to learn more about the person I'm responding to. Easier to ask a question about a tangible than an imaginary and all that.
  - mjevans 6y ago
    It should be the speed of culture progressing. I'd be happier with something like 10 years, and paying exponentially increasing fees to renew it past that mark in exchange for keeping culture locked up. Trademarks? That's a consumer protection service and for a small percent of profits on marked items plus a flat fee should be allowed.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      > It should be the speed of culture progressing. I'd be happier with something like 10 years, and paying exponentially increasing fees to renew it past that mark in exchange for keeping culture locked up. The exponentially increasing cost works well. Start off at a $10 registration for ten years, then multiply by 10 for each subsequent ten year registration. You want to renew that 120 year old copyright on an individual work? No problem, that'll be ten trillion dollars for the next ten years, see you in ten years when it's a hundred trillion. Meanwhile 90% of everything enters the public domain inside of twenty years because it's not worth paying a thousand bucks for another ten. > Trademarks? That's a consumer protection service and for a small percent of profits on marked items plus a flat fee should be allowed. Trademarks are fine the way they are. Nobody is complaining about the term of trademarks, which is as long as you're actually using it. It would actually be better if copyright required that -- so that if you want to retain a copyright it can't be out of print for more than ten years.
CodesInChaos 6y ago
I'd go with something like "30 years after publication or 30+5 years after creation whichever is earlier". (Duration to be bikeshed) The "after publication" part is the common case and easy to handle this publication dates are easy to figure out. The "after creation" part is a fallback in case works are discovered long a after their creation. I don't like basing it on the Author's lifetime, it feels both unfair and complicates the rule significantly.

TeeMassive 6y ago

In French, copyright is called "author's rights". When I hear that copyright endures 70 years after death... well it's not longer the author's right