3 ms·
That seems to benefit large corporations at the expense of smaller artists. Either you focus on making money or some large corporation will swoop in the second
by marcinzm 2y ago
That seems to benefit large corporations at the expense of smaller artists. Either you focus on making money or some large corporation will swoop in the second you can't and exploit your work for their own profit.
- immibis 2y agoPresumably, once the copyright is allowed to expire, it can't be sold and then reinstated. I'm okay with large corporations pouring their money at the government to keep copyrights for useless things alive, even if it means we can't legally copy useless things for a bit longer.
- BlueTemplar 2y agoWouldn't they then buy it just before expiration ?
- falcor84 2y agoExactly, if the clock is ticking for them to bid on it, to buy it off the small business, it gives the small business power, and should also make it easier for the small business to get decent loans/investments. Btw, if I'm not mistaken, I first read about this proposal in the book "Radical Markets: Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society" by Eric A. Posner and Eric Glen Weyl https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691177502/radical-markets https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691177502/ra...
- marcinzm 2y ago> Presumably, once the copyright is allowed to expire, it can't be sold and then reinstated. Derivative works have their own copyrights. The original book is free for grabs but each movie franchise has it's own copyrights. Likely far more valuable and ones the original artist will never see a cent from.
- astrange 2y ago"Exponentially" larger is a very large number. They wouldn't be able to afford it either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat_and_chessboard_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat_and_chessboard_problem