4 ms·

I can't agree enough. And the longer we take to address all if these problems, the harsher the backlash is going to be. I'm so disgruntled with copyright I almo

by jeffool 15y ago

I can't agree enough. And the longer we take to address all if these problems, the harsher the backlash is going to be. I'm so disgruntled with copyright I almost think 10 years is too long.

grncdr 15y ago
Cross-posted from the G+ thread: Regarding limiting copyright to 10 years, and since you brought up ponies, I feel that solves the wrong problem. The issue I see is that a few large greedy corporations effectively monopolize the copyrights for the vast majority of the nation/worlds creative output, that they then further exploit a corrupt political system to extend those copyrights indefinitely is almost secondary. A thought experiment: make the sales/purchase of copyright ownership illegal. This would still allow an artist or creator to license the right to sell and distribute their work, but leave them unable to lose (legal) control of such distribution. This still allows a lot of room for the mega-corps to profit, but with less outright exploitation of artists than we currently see. Copyrights are held by the creator(s) for life, and works pass into the public domain after death, not the artists estates (or more often, the organization that owns the copyright). I feel this is simple to understand, fair to creators, and still provides business incentives to non-creators to invest time and money in the production and promotion of quality content.
- stan_rogers 15y ago
  A lot of legitimate copyright ownership depends on the ability to assign copyright. It varies by work and by jurisdiction, but the default copyright holder (by statute) is not always the party it should be. In the US, for instance, a corporation's identity might belong by default to the designer, such that they may be able to register trademarks but be prevented from using them freely without copyright assignment. In Canada, the commissioner, not the creator, of a work holds copyright by default, so contracts of commission for things like portraits and weddings photos usually include a copyright assignment clause. (That's actually an improvement over the previous state of affairs, in which the photographer would have to hire the subject as a model for a nominal fee in one contract, then have another contract for purchase and use of the work.) I suppose you could legislate the general condition, but there will always be edge cases. Unfortunately, allowing for edge cases is going to result in abuse.
modeless 15y ago
I'd love to see some statistics showing revenue from copyrighted works vs. age. I'm betting the vast majority of revenue (and especially revenue which actually accrues to the original creator) is made in the first 3-5 years, after which continuing copyright protection is a net drain on society. As the internet continues to accelerate our culture, that time is only going to grow shorter. Longer copyright terms may have made sense in the past when distribution was hard, but today's world moves much faster, and the law needs to catch up.
- jeffool 15y ago
  There is no natural progression of law here. The first US copyright laws lasted seven years. Works were sold to publishers, they were printed, and shipped around the nation on boats and trains. Seven years. Now with a mouse click anyone can upload music and books to digital storefronts. The law has caught up, directly in favor of those who own the majority of successful IP. As culture has accelerated our laws have only gotten more draconian. I'm all for this fight, but don't doubt that it will be just that, a fight that the victors will write the history of.
- moultano 15y ago
  This is so different from industry to industry that I don't think it makes sense to aggregate the statistics. Plenty of photographers and illustrators for instance make large fractions of their income from reselling stock images long after they were created.
  - derefr 15y ago
    It'd be interesting if the law had some sort of "activation" clause, where the copyright would only start to tick toward expiry once a single cent of royalties had been made. That way, things that immediately start to make money (like music and movies) would immediately start to count down, while things that can take years to be licensed (like stock photos) will only start their countdown when someone actually payed for them.
  - philwelch 15y ago
    I believe patent expiration varies from industry to industry; certainly copyright expiration could too?
yuhong 15y ago
I'd suggest a short default copyright period with a renewal system for the works that do require a long copyright period like the infamous Mickey Mouse.
- zecho 15y ago
  The biggest hurdle with copyright is the Berne Convention. Copyright isn't merely an American problem, but one that needs to be tackled globally.
  - fleitz 15y ago
    Opt out of it / ignore it, if the US can opt out of the Geneva convention then it shouldn't be a big deal to get out of the Bern convention. I'm sure John Yoo could find something in the Constitution to allow it.
- jeffool 15y ago
  I'd ask if we need to extend copyright on Mickey Mouse films? What good does that do? Now, extension of trademark, that I get to a limited degree. They can be the sole Mickey maker for a while. But why should they not have to make new material to generate new income from it?
  - Duff 15y ago
    There is a flip side to this: why should you have the ability to take the hard work of whomever came up with Mickey Mouse and take it in a direction that the creator doesn't like? Say you wrote an open source software package in 2004. Should Microsoft be able to take your work and incorporate it into a proprietary package, just because 7 years passed?
    - yuhong 15y ago
      On the other hand, there is the problem of abandonware that is so old the owner don't actually enforces copyright on it anymore but technically it is still copyrighted.

by jeffool 15y ago

I can't agree enough. And the longer we take to address all if these problems, the harsher the backlash is going to be. I'm so disgruntled with copyright I almost think 10 years is too long.

grncdr 15y ago

Cross-posted from the G+ thread: Regarding limiting copyright to 10 years, and since you brought up ponies, I feel that solves the wrong problem. The issue I see is that a few large greedy corporations effectively monopolize the copyrights for the vast majority of the nation/worlds creative output, that they then further exploit a corrupt political system to extend those copyrights indefinitely is almost secondary. A thought experiment: make the sales/purchase of copyright ownership illegal. This would still allow an artist or creator to license the right to sell and distribute their work, but leave them unable to lose (legal) control of such distribution. This still allows a lot of room for the mega-corps to profit, but with less outright exploitation of artists than we currently see. Copyrights are held by the creator(s) for life, and works pass into the public domain after death, not the artists estates (or more often, the organization that owns the copyright). I feel this is simple to understand, fair to creators, and still provides business incentives to non-creators to invest time and money in the production and promotion of quality content.

stan_rogers 15y ago
A lot of legitimate copyright ownership depends on the ability to assign copyright. It varies by work and by jurisdiction, but the default copyright holder (by statute) is not always the party it should be. In the US, for instance, a corporation's identity might belong by default to the designer, such that they may be able to register trademarks but be prevented from using them freely without copyright assignment. In Canada, the commissioner, not the creator, of a work holds copyright by default, so contracts of commission for things like portraits and weddings photos usually include a copyright assignment clause. (That's actually an improvement over the previous state of affairs, in which the photographer would have to hire the subject as a model for a nominal fee in one contract, then have another contract for purchase and use of the work.) I suppose you could legislate the general condition, but there will always be edge cases. Unfortunately, allowing for edge cases is going to result in abuse.

modeless 15y ago

I'd love to see some statistics showing revenue from copyrighted works vs. age. I'm betting the vast majority of revenue (and especially revenue which actually accrues to the original creator) is made in the first 3-5 years, after which continuing copyright protection is a net drain on society. As the internet continues to accelerate our culture, that time is only going to grow shorter. Longer copyright terms may have made sense in the past when distribution was hard, but today's world moves much faster, and the law needs to catch up.

jeffool 15y ago
There is no natural progression of law here. The first US copyright laws lasted seven years. Works were sold to publishers, they were printed, and shipped around the nation on boats and trains. Seven years. Now with a mouse click anyone can upload music and books to digital storefronts. The law has caught up, directly in favor of those who own the majority of successful IP. As culture has accelerated our laws have only gotten more draconian. I'm all for this fight, but don't doubt that it will be just that, a fight that the victors will write the history of.
moultano 15y ago
This is so different from industry to industry that I don't think it makes sense to aggregate the statistics. Plenty of photographers and illustrators for instance make large fractions of their income from reselling stock images long after they were created.
- derefr 15y ago
  It'd be interesting if the law had some sort of "activation" clause, where the copyright would only start to tick toward expiry once a single cent of royalties had been made. That way, things that immediately start to make money (like music and movies) would immediately start to count down, while things that can take years to be licensed (like stock photos) will only start their countdown when someone actually payed for them.
- philwelch 15y ago
  I believe patent expiration varies from industry to industry; certainly copyright expiration could too?

yuhong 15y ago

I'd suggest a short default copyright period with a renewal system for the works that do require a long copyright period like the infamous Mickey Mouse.

zecho 15y ago
The biggest hurdle with copyright is the Berne Convention. Copyright isn't merely an American problem, but one that needs to be tackled globally.
- fleitz 15y ago
  Opt out of it / ignore it, if the US can opt out of the Geneva convention then it shouldn't be a big deal to get out of the Bern convention. I'm sure John Yoo could find something in the Constitution to allow it.
jeffool 15y ago
I'd ask if we need to extend copyright on Mickey Mouse films? What good does that do? Now, extension of trademark, that I get to a limited degree. They can be the sole Mickey maker for a while. But why should they not have to make new material to generate new income from it?
- Duff 15y ago
  There is a flip side to this: why should you have the ability to take the hard work of whomever came up with Mickey Mouse and take it in a direction that the creator doesn't like? Say you wrote an open source software package in 2004. Should Microsoft be able to take your work and incorporate it into a proprietary package, just because 7 years passed?
  - yuhong 15y ago
    On the other hand, there is the problem of abandonware that is so old the owner don't actually enforces copyright on it anymore but technically it is still copyrighted.