8 ms·
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
by 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.