3 ms·

If I could pass my ideal version of copyright to the world, this is what I would dream: 1. Copyright is 20-30 years in length, maximum. (We can argue about tha

If I could pass my ideal version of copyright to the world, this is what I would dream: 1. Copyright is 20-30 years in length, maximum. (We can argue about that.) 2. For computer programs, a copy of all source code, build tools, and final binaries must be supplied in an offline format (maybe a Blu-ray Disc or a few?) to the Library of Congress to store, duplicate, and preserve as needed. This content will then be released on the copyright expiration, and the offline format is meant to render computer hacking ineffective for stealing the work. For software as a service that is continuously improved, new discs must be received yearly. #2, I think, already has precedent considering the patent system. A patent is meant to describe how to perfectly recreate the patented technology (minus, maybe, a few trade secrets), so why not copyrightable software?

chungy 3y ago
We do need major copyright reform, and I think even splitting copyright into categories makes sense. Some time-sensitive content, like sports and news broadcasts, might only warrant 4-5 years of copyright protection before becoming public domain. Books and movies may as well enjoy the 20-30 time frame you propose (the original 1790 copyright act offered a maximum of 28 years of protection, if you bought a 14-year extension to the default 14-year term). Software might warrant just 10 years of copyright protection, which is just about the maximum length that corporate support exists for; it could be reasonable to allow for a 10-year extension to an initial 10 years.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> #2, I think, already has precedent considering the patent system. Deposit requirement is already part of the copyright system, applying to everything published that is subject to copyright unless exempted by regulation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/407 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/407
- mschuster91 3y ago
  Depositing assets is one thing, but the real change would be to deposit sources as well. Say, a book... if it got typeset on a computer, then the full files and fonts have to be deposited as well.
  - kjellsbells 3y ago
    I can just imagine Donald Knuth reading this, running his hands with glee, and starting the next thirty years of his work. Maybe keeping it nice and easy to start with by a six volume discussion of what a file is.
paulddraper 3y ago
> a copy of all source code, build tools, and final binaries must be supplied in an offline format (maybe a Blu-ray Disc or a few?) to the Library of Congress to store, duplicate, and preserve as needed Dude, I just want my turtle to move around on the screen. Now I have to ship Blu-rays to Congress?
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  Not your personal project, this idea was pitched solely for corporations who develop software. In my mind, this would most benefit video game preservation which is currently in a state of disarray. It would also protect corporations from themselves, as there have been multiple instances of high-profile retro games having their source code completely lost when they come back for a remaster. A big example of this is Square Enix which lost the source code for multiple games, including (infamously) Final Fantasy 7. The remaster was a reverse-engineering project. They were also rumored to have lost Final Fantasy 8 though this was later shown incorrect. (And, in addition to that, they lost all of Kingdom Hearts 1). And that's just the mistakes we know of. (There's also Konami losing Silent Hill...)
dave4420 3y ago
That would effectively force most free software into the public domain?
delta_p_delta_x 3y ago
> Library of Congress I suppose the US is the only country in the world, and if I release software in Europe, I've got to ship it across the pond...
- Smoosh 3y ago
  It's somewhat ironic that the country which seems to have the most people fear-mongering about "one world government" is also the country with the most people who think that their government is the only one in the world.
johannes1234321 3y ago
#2 may work for old software, but how can this work for contemporary, which even for "on premise" use receives frequent patches and updates? And becomes really tough with modern "cloud" (in broad meaning) software, which is tied to a lot of infrastructure. And yes, I share the goal! I however don't see a practical way.
aidenn0 3y ago
I think 20 years with N optional 10 year renewals (where N can be debated[1]). I'd like it to be short enough for the less-profitable works to make archivists jobs easier, but long enough for authors to be able to profit off of commercial adaptations (e.g. the GoT show appeared 15 years after the book was published). I like #2, but it could be a burden; perhaps only registered works should do it (and registering would be required for renewals). 1: I like 3, which is much shorter than current copyright but significantly longer than you suggest
- duskwuff 3y ago
  IMO, the optimal solution will be to make some kind of change in copyright law which distinguishes between personal, imaginative, creative works (like a novel or a painting) and corporate, formulaic, functional works (like a word processor or a textbook). Whether the line should be drawn along the personal/corporate axis or the creative/functional one is up for debate.
  - aidenn0 3y ago
    There are already some divides for personal/corporate (see e.g. the "Work for hire" rules), and purely functional works are already limited in how copyrightable they can be (see e.g. [1]). Once you get away from purely functional into things like textbooks and word-processors, things get complicated quickly. If I write a word-perfect clone, that's pretty darn functional, yet I probably make lots of creative choices in the process that are hidden from the user. If it's a word processor with its own peculiar interface, there are even user-visible creative choices. Did you perhaps mean aesthetic versus functional? If so, then that's even more of a treacherous area. How many people have Minard's famous chart[2] hanging on their wall for aesthetic reasons? Or what about e.g. Dr. Suess' books. Are those aesthetic, or are they an educational tool? 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v._Static_Control_Components,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v..... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minard#/media/File:Minard.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minard#/media/File:Minard.png
Delk 3y ago
#2 wouldn't work internationally. Of course the US can internally have whatever kind of legislation they want, including whatever requirements for having one's works covered by copyright. But non-US authors or companies (or government organizations) obviously can't be obliged to supply materials to the US Library of Congress. You could deny them copyright protection for their software within the US if they don't but that wouldn't be exactly popular. Of course you could still do it purely internally within the US for software whose copyright belongs to US organizations or individuals, and it might achieve some of what you want.

chungy 3y ago

We do need major copyright reform, and I think even splitting copyright into categories makes sense. Some time-sensitive content, like sports and news broadcasts, might only warrant 4-5 years of copyright protection before becoming public domain. Books and movies may as well enjoy the 20-30 time frame you propose (the original 1790 copyright act offered a maximum of 28 years of protection, if you bought a 14-year extension to the default 14-year term). Software might warrant just 10 years of copyright protection, which is just about the maximum length that corporate support exists for; it could be reasonable to allow for a 10-year extension to an initial 10 years.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> #2, I think, already has precedent considering the patent system. Deposit requirement is already part of the copyright system, applying to everything published that is subject to copyright unless exempted by regulation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/407 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/407

mschuster91 3y ago
Depositing assets is one thing, but the real change would be to deposit sources as well. Say, a book... if it got typeset on a computer, then the full files and fonts have to be deposited as well.
- kjellsbells 3y ago
  I can just imagine Donald Knuth reading this, running his hands with glee, and starting the next thirty years of his work. Maybe keeping it nice and easy to start with by a six volume discussion of what a file is.

paulddraper 3y ago

> a copy of all source code, build tools, and final binaries must be supplied in an offline format (maybe a Blu-ray Disc or a few?) to the Library of Congress to store, duplicate, and preserve as needed Dude, I just want my turtle to move around on the screen. Now I have to ship Blu-rays to Congress?

gjsman-1000 3y ago
Not your personal project, this idea was pitched solely for corporations who develop software. In my mind, this would most benefit video game preservation which is currently in a state of disarray. It would also protect corporations from themselves, as there have been multiple instances of high-profile retro games having their source code completely lost when they come back for a remaster. A big example of this is Square Enix which lost the source code for multiple games, including (infamously) Final Fantasy 7. The remaster was a reverse-engineering project. They were also rumored to have lost Final Fantasy 8 though this was later shown incorrect. (And, in addition to that, they lost all of Kingdom Hearts 1). And that's just the mistakes we know of. (There's also Konami losing Silent Hill...)

dave4420 3y ago

That would effectively force most free software into the public domain?

delta_p_delta_x 3y ago

> Library of Congress I suppose the US is the only country in the world, and if I release software in Europe, I've got to ship it across the pond...

Smoosh 3y ago
It's somewhat ironic that the country which seems to have the most people fear-mongering about "one world government" is also the country with the most people who think that their government is the only one in the world.

johannes1234321 3y ago

#2 may work for old software, but how can this work for contemporary, which even for "on premise" use receives frequent patches and updates? And becomes really tough with modern "cloud" (in broad meaning) software, which is tied to a lot of infrastructure. And yes, I share the goal! I however don't see a practical way.

aidenn0 3y ago

I think 20 years with N optional 10 year renewals (where N can be debated[1]). I'd like it to be short enough for the less-profitable works to make archivists jobs easier, but long enough for authors to be able to profit off of commercial adaptations (e.g. the GoT show appeared 15 years after the book was published). I like #2, but it could be a burden; perhaps only registered works should do it (and registering would be required for renewals). 1: I like 3, which is much shorter than current copyright but significantly longer than you suggest

duskwuff 3y ago
IMO, the optimal solution will be to make some kind of change in copyright law which distinguishes between personal, imaginative, creative works (like a novel or a painting) and corporate, formulaic, functional works (like a word processor or a textbook). Whether the line should be drawn along the personal/corporate axis or the creative/functional one is up for debate.
- aidenn0 3y ago
  There are already some divides for personal/corporate (see e.g. the "Work for hire" rules), and purely functional works are already limited in how copyrightable they can be (see e.g. [1]). Once you get away from purely functional into things like textbooks and word-processors, things get complicated quickly. If I write a word-perfect clone, that's pretty darn functional, yet I probably make lots of creative choices in the process that are hidden from the user. If it's a word processor with its own peculiar interface, there are even user-visible creative choices. Did you perhaps mean aesthetic versus functional? If so, then that's even more of a treacherous area. How many people have Minard's famous chart[2] hanging on their wall for aesthetic reasons? Or what about e.g. Dr. Suess' books. Are those aesthetic, or are they an educational tool? 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v._Static_Control_Components,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexmark_International,_Inc._v..... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minard#/media/File:Minard.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minard#/media/File:Minard.png

Delk 3y ago

#2 wouldn't work internationally. Of course the US can internally have whatever kind of legislation they want, including whatever requirements for having one's works covered by copyright. But non-US authors or companies (or government organizations) obviously can't be obliged to supply materials to the US Library of Congress. You could deny them copyright protection for their software within the US if they don't but that wouldn't be exactly popular. Of course you could still do it purely internally within the US for software whose copyright belongs to US organizations or individuals, and it might achieve some of what you want.