3 ms·

I like very much your idea of making it as easy as possible for someone to consume and re-use as far as whatever is possible permits. But I would think that th

by Hannan 12y ago

I like very much your idea of making it as easy as possible for someone to consume and re-use as far as whatever is possible permits. But I would think that the Internet Archive or some Google text/video/image search with "scraped on:yyyy-mm-dd" would essentially give you permission if the scrape date was less than (Now() - <X years original reproduction is prohibited>) or (Now() - <Y years "substantially" derivative works are prohibited>); where Y is probably less than X. Then someone could have exclusive rights to publish their works for (say) 10 years, while an artist could potentially make a different work after (again, say) 5 years. I only follow this enough to make highly illogical conclusions, but it seems like a blogger shouldn't have to register every single post with a central authority to retain a very limited length copyright. They should have some time to publish a "Greatest Hits", and if they don't during tlicensed", then "Greatest Hits PLUS today's take on past events" would seem to lure the die-hards. Ultimately though, I don't feel it should be on the creator to register every creation. In your example, I would hope the person that "licensed" it to you would be responsible, and not you, but I've heard possession of stolen goods can be a tricky area (at least in the U.S.) even if you have no prior knowledge, so I don't hold high hopes for reasonable property decisions concerning intellectual property rather than physical.

MereInterest 12y ago
Except that scraping itself would be prohibited by copyright law. This is why there should be some central repository, so that there can be a legal copy that is available to the public after the copyright expires.
andrewfong 12y ago
The cost of having a blogger register every post seems like an implementation detail. There's no reason Wordpress couldn't auto-register every post the say way it auto-publishes posts via RSS. Alternatively, you could simply register the blog as a whole with the copyright registrar and the Library of Congress would be responsible for periodically re-indexing your site. As a final compromise, we could grant the creator something like a 10-year window to register. Any copies made prior to registration (and maybe within a 30 day buffer after registration) would still be allowed, but any copies made after registration would be limited by copyright. That would allow for easy initial consumption and re-use (including archival and scraping) but permit the original creator to have some say over large-scale commercialization of his or her "greatest hits". As a philosophical point, I think it should be on the creator to register every creation (at least if said creator wants copyright protection on it). You are claiming a property right over an amorphous thing you do not physically possess. The least you could do is to be provider clear notice to the public of what exactly it is you are claiming rights over. In that sense, copyright is less like personal property and more like real estate, where owners are expected to register their deeds to enjoy full legal protection of their property rights. Also, as a practical matter, we're also more likely to see registration requirements passed than a reduction of copyright to 5 or 10 years (historically, it's been about 14-28 years in the U.S.).

by Hannan 12y ago

MereInterest 12y ago

Except that scraping itself would be prohibited by copyright law. This is why there should be some central repository, so that there can be a legal copy that is available to the public after the copyright expires.

andrewfong 12y ago

The cost of having a blogger register every post seems like an implementation detail. There's no reason Wordpress couldn't auto-register every post the say way it auto-publishes posts via RSS. Alternatively, you could simply register the blog as a whole with the copyright registrar and the Library of Congress would be responsible for periodically re-indexing your site. As a final compromise, we could grant the creator something like a 10-year window to register. Any copies made prior to registration (and maybe within a 30 day buffer after registration) would still be allowed, but any copies made after registration would be limited by copyright. That would allow for easy initial consumption and re-use (including archival and scraping) but permit the original creator to have some say over large-scale commercialization of his or her "greatest hits". As a philosophical point, I think it should be on the creator to register every creation (at least if said creator wants copyright protection on it). You are claiming a property right over an amorphous thing you do not physically possess. The least you could do is to be provider clear notice to the public of what exactly it is you are claiming rights over. In that sense, copyright is less like personal property and more like real estate, where owners are expected to register their deeds to enjoy full legal protection of their property rights. Also, as a practical matter, we're also more likely to see registration requirements passed than a reduction of copyright to 5 or 10 years (historically, it's been about 14-28 years in the U.S.).