4 ms·

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 create

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.
- benibela 6y ago
  I thought it was so that no one kills the author to end their copyright
- dafoex 6y ago
  I think 50 is far too long. Patents for inventions that have the potential to revolutionise the way we live our lives only get 20 years of so-called protection. Creative publications that only provide emotional enrichment at best should be given the same or less time as patents.

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.
benibela 6y ago
I thought it was so that no one kills the author to end their copyright
dafoex 6y ago
I think 50 is far too long. Patents for inventions that have the potential to revolutionise the way we live our lives only get 20 years of so-called protection. Creative publications that only provide emotional enrichment at best should be given the same or less time as patents.