5 ms·

Let's tie it to the length of copyright law. If it's still protected and under copyright then the obligation to keep it available exists. So if they want to kee

Let's tie it to the length of copyright law. If it's still protected and under copyright then the obligation to keep it available exists. So if they want to keep extending copyright, well, it will go both ways.

lamontcg 3y ago
And if they want to stop maintaining it, let them have the option of releasing it into the public domain and sending a digital copy to the library of congress or something.
- android42 3y ago
  At the very least I would also accept a DRM free copy being provided to everyone who had purchased it (e.g. at least one year or so to download it), and in failure to do that it becomes public domain. Anything less and we basically just end up with the classic xkcd situation https://xkcd.com/488/ https://xkcd.com/488/
  - cncovyvysi 3y ago
    Why bend the knee? They want insane copyright protections. We do to.
- PurpleRamen 3y ago
  You can't make a work public domain, just because one distributor is shutting down their digital library. In the first place, they don't even have the rights for this, they just resell other people's work. Demanding for ensuring another way for accessing the work in the same or similar way is fair enough. You lose nothing, they gain nothing, fairly balanced.
  - flenserboy 3y ago
    True. Yet I think the idea is sound — if a publisher / rights holder refuses to put a work into print or make it available, they should not be able to keep it away from the public. Copyright is a benefit given to authors & publishers, but is too-often used to suppress works due to content or retire works that can be replaced in the catalog by more profitable offerings.
    - lamontcg 3y ago
      Yeah it needs to be made transitive. If you've bought a digital copy of the work from one distributor that should obligate the rightsholder to transferring the individual distribution rights (this needs to be nailed to the wall by the legislature so that distribution rights all carry this mandate by law). If they want to switch distributors then the old distributor needs to be obligated to provide a method of transferring those individual distribution rights to the new distributor. If all this is "too burdensome" (editorial note: cry harder about your profits you fucking capitalist goons) then all the parties can just make it public domain.
      - android42 3y ago
        Yep, and if they want to end distribution altogether or start fresh and still keep copyright, they could distribute DRM free copies for some minimum time frame.
  - Bene592 3y ago
    If the distributor doesn't want it anymore the author or publisher should get a different one
    - lagerlagerlager 3y ago
      ......
crazygringo 3y ago
That's a clever idea, but I'm not sure it really works because the company who owns the copyright isn't necessarily the company providing the stream to you digitally. This is about ensuring it stays available from the streaming distributor, and how much time remains on the copyright doesn't really have anything to do with them. And even if the copyright expires next year, I still want to make sure I can keep streaming it for the next 10 or 15 years or whatever, if I buy it today.
- bcrosby95 3y ago
  If it expires next year then you could download it free anyways.
  - j16sdiz 3y ago
    I am not buying the content, I am buying the service. What I expect as a part of deal was, to have access to that content without worrying about backups or storage spaces. If they can't provide that, it have to be communicated upfront.
    - mjevans 3y ago
      Presently, in practical terms, 'lifetime' may as well be 100 years. Though I'd still prefer to see it as 'lifetime*' ... '*lifetime is 100 years'.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    Not if nobody makes it available. Just because a copyright expires doesn't mean somebody has given you free access. Plenty of copyrighted works have simply been lost to the ages.
- android42 3y ago
  If the provider made it available for purchase (not subscription), the liability should go to them first to make DRM free copies available for those who purchased it before shutting down the service. If they are unable to do so, e.g. a sudden bankruptcy, then the liability could go to the copyright holder to find another provider to continue the service and transfer purchases, or provide DRM free copies (either should not be a problem if they are still making money from the given IP). In the event they are no longer making enough money from that IP and wish to just rid their hands of it, it becomes public domain.
SlightlyLeftPad 3y ago
This is too easy to loophole out of and it leaves too big of a hole to patch. As a company, all I would need to do is sell the rights, shut down the service, buy it back, rinse and repeat. I don’t think this is a great solution.
- consp 3y ago
  Which they shouldn't do unpenalized since selling would void the contract.
- android42 3y ago
  Then they can be blocked from selling the rights without the liability of maintaining the service being attached. In order to end the obligation of maintaining the service, DRM free copies must be provided to everyone who purchased the content for some minimum time frame. Failure to do so puts the work in the public domain.
- eru 3y ago
  That's awful for your reputation.
  - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
    whereas this shit here is doing some wonders!
  - SlightlyLeftPad 3y ago
    I chuckled a little bit when I read this. I honestly believe this isn’t something these companies care about at all. It already does damage their reputation yet we see it happen again and again. I do wonder why, does it come down to the monopolization of content? I want to say I’m surprised but I’m not.
  - brnt 3y ago
    We don't buy Sony/Apple/Microsoft/etc because we want to, but because we have no choice. To too big to care.
hcfman 3y ago
That is a very wise and good suggestion. I love it. I like that restrictions abe decisions (such as law making) also come with consequences and responsibilities.

lamontcg 3y ago

And if they want to stop maintaining it, let them have the option of releasing it into the public domain and sending a digital copy to the library of congress or something.

android42 3y ago
At the very least I would also accept a DRM free copy being provided to everyone who had purchased it (e.g. at least one year or so to download it), and in failure to do that it becomes public domain. Anything less and we basically just end up with the classic xkcd situation https://xkcd.com/488/ https://xkcd.com/488/
- cncovyvysi 3y ago
  Why bend the knee? They want insane copyright protections. We do to.
PurpleRamen 3y ago
You can't make a work public domain, just because one distributor is shutting down their digital library. In the first place, they don't even have the rights for this, they just resell other people's work. Demanding for ensuring another way for accessing the work in the same or similar way is fair enough. You lose nothing, they gain nothing, fairly balanced.
- flenserboy 3y ago
  True. Yet I think the idea is sound — if a publisher / rights holder refuses to put a work into print or make it available, they should not be able to keep it away from the public. Copyright is a benefit given to authors & publishers, but is too-often used to suppress works due to content or retire works that can be replaced in the catalog by more profitable offerings.
  - lamontcg 3y ago
    Yeah it needs to be made transitive. If you've bought a digital copy of the work from one distributor that should obligate the rightsholder to transferring the individual distribution rights (this needs to be nailed to the wall by the legislature so that distribution rights all carry this mandate by law). If they want to switch distributors then the old distributor needs to be obligated to provide a method of transferring those individual distribution rights to the new distributor. If all this is "too burdensome" (editorial note: cry harder about your profits you fucking capitalist goons) then all the parties can just make it public domain.
    - android42 3y ago
      Yep, and if they want to end distribution altogether or start fresh and still keep copyright, they could distribute DRM free copies for some minimum time frame.
- Bene592 3y ago
  If the distributor doesn't want it anymore the author or publisher should get a different one
  - lagerlagerlager 3y ago
    ......

crazygringo 3y ago

That's a clever idea, but I'm not sure it really works because the company who owns the copyright isn't necessarily the company providing the stream to you digitally. This is about ensuring it stays available from the streaming distributor, and how much time remains on the copyright doesn't really have anything to do with them. And even if the copyright expires next year, I still want to make sure I can keep streaming it for the next 10 or 15 years or whatever, if I buy it today.

bcrosby95 3y ago
If it expires next year then you could download it free anyways.
- j16sdiz 3y ago
  I am not buying the content, I am buying the service. What I expect as a part of deal was, to have access to that content without worrying about backups or storage spaces. If they can't provide that, it have to be communicated upfront.
  - mjevans 3y ago
    Presently, in practical terms, 'lifetime' may as well be 100 years. Though I'd still prefer to see it as 'lifetime*' ... '*lifetime is 100 years'.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  Not if nobody makes it available. Just because a copyright expires doesn't mean somebody has given you free access. Plenty of copyrighted works have simply been lost to the ages.
android42 3y ago
If the provider made it available for purchase (not subscription), the liability should go to them first to make DRM free copies available for those who purchased it before shutting down the service. If they are unable to do so, e.g. a sudden bankruptcy, then the liability could go to the copyright holder to find another provider to continue the service and transfer purchases, or provide DRM free copies (either should not be a problem if they are still making money from the given IP). In the event they are no longer making enough money from that IP and wish to just rid their hands of it, it becomes public domain.

SlightlyLeftPad 3y ago

This is too easy to loophole out of and it leaves too big of a hole to patch. As a company, all I would need to do is sell the rights, shut down the service, buy it back, rinse and repeat. I don’t think this is a great solution.

consp 3y ago
Which they shouldn't do unpenalized since selling would void the contract.
android42 3y ago
Then they can be blocked from selling the rights without the liability of maintaining the service being attached. In order to end the obligation of maintaining the service, DRM free copies must be provided to everyone who purchased the content for some minimum time frame. Failure to do so puts the work in the public domain.
eru 3y ago
That's awful for your reputation.
- bryanrasmussen 3y ago
  whereas this shit here is doing some wonders!
- SlightlyLeftPad 3y ago
  I chuckled a little bit when I read this. I honestly believe this isn’t something these companies care about at all. It already does damage their reputation yet we see it happen again and again. I do wonder why, does it come down to the monopolization of content? I want to say I’m surprised but I’m not.
- brnt 3y ago
  We don't buy Sony/Apple/Microsoft/etc because we want to, but because we have no choice. To too big to care.

hcfman 3y ago

That is a very wise and good suggestion. I love it. I like that restrictions abe decisions (such as law making) also come with consequences and responsibilities.