3 ms·
While this might be frustrating on the surface, this is exactly the sort of thing that should be decided by the lawmakers. You might personally dislike what the
by casca 15y ago
While this might be frustrating on the surface, this is exactly the sort of thing that should be decided by the lawmakers. You might personally dislike what the US legislative branch has become, but if you follow that it is acting in the interests of the citizens who elected them, this is the correct decision.
- markbao 15y agoIdeally, yes. However, Congress' approval rate is 13% right now. That's not anywhere near "acting in the interests of the citizens who elected them."
- dantheman 15y agoI beg to differ, the Constitution clearly specifies why copyright should exist: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." How does retroactively adding copyright to public domain works in anyway "promote" it's already been accomplished. This the same argument that was used Eldred vs. Ashcroft where this argument also failed. It was a bad ruling then and it's a bad ruling now. If we want to have this decided by the lawmakers then we should amend the Constitution to grant this power.
- Volpe 15y agoPerhaps, because the world doesn't begin and end with the US east and west coast. If you ignore the fact this is still under copyright overseas, you are setting the precedent that they can do the same in return. No?
- joering1 15y agothe problem is that many times the world follows US laws and regulations and applies those locally (also: student being deported to US based on broken UK law that UK itself wasnt interested in prosecuting)
- rayiner 15y agoWhat "promote the progress of science and useful arts" is such fuzzy language, deferring to the legislature's idea of what promotes that progress is as reasonable a decision as imposing the Court's own view. Of course adding a given public domain work back into copyright doesn't promote the creation of any specific work, but harmonizing American copyright law with European laws, generally, might arguably promote creation of works. The key phrase in the clause is that: [The Congress shall have Power]* to... [secure] for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. *) Article I, Section 8. Like the other enumerated powers, the language of the Constitution gives Congress a lot of leeway in exercising that specific power.
- 1010011010 15y agoCopyright terms should be reduced to the original 14 years, if not less, retroactively. Copyrights should be non-renewable. Obtaining copyright should require registering each work with the copyright office. There should be an annual fee for maintaining a copyright that is proportional to the revenue received from the copyright. There should additionally be stiff penalties for asserting copyright when you do not actually have it.
- silentOpen 15y agoI have to register my GPL'd script to protect my attribution? No thanks. Everything should be immediately copyrighted if you mark it and specify its license terms. 14 years is long enough for total copyright but attribution rights should last forever.