3 ms·

I'd rather give it to individuals than corporations at least. It's useful as a lever to protect the weak from the powerful. Perhaps it should simply not be tra

by t43562 22d ago

I'd rather give it to individuals than corporations at least. It's useful as a lever to protect the weak from the powerful. Perhaps it should simply not be transferable? Another alternative would be for its power to weaken over time in some way.

kolinko 22d ago
Then you will prevent corporations from paying authors to create work altogether.
- exe34 22d ago
  They can still sell the stuff for 10-20 years and make a huge profit. They just can't use it for multi-generational runaway growth.
- r-w 22d ago
  You don't think they would still pay them for the right to publish, if not ownership of the copyright itself?
pbhjpbhj 21d ago
In a recent one of these threads someone suggested that a short term starts when the work changes hands (or, I'd also say when a contract/instrument is made including it, or a payment is made allowing control). So, you could keep it to get your full X years (I like 20), or lease/sell and the work would enter the public domain sooner.