To clarify, I do not argue for the elimination or reduction of copyright law and patents, but rather for a return to sensible limits on duration of a copyright and patent. I do not view this as weakening of copyright. I view this as essential to the public interest, and am confident that this will free up substantial access to intellectual property for others to build upon. Disseminate widely the bricks of knowledge so that many may build, and so that what they build they can build freely with, with confidence that they won't risk accidental patent infringements.
Not clear why this would weaken copyright? I think the argument is that these extensive durations provide incentive to invest in developing the intellectual or artistic content. I disagree. I think there are plenty of other motives to innovate, and plenty of room to make a profit, and under a copyright regime where the duration one can hold a copyright is in a more reasonable time frame.. Lets say 5-15 years... Maybe less for some software processes... We'll be reducing concentration of ownership of intellectual property and the means of generating further intellectual property. This is what it is really about, isn't it? Innovators will still make money, and will still have protection of rights to their property for specific periods. What duration is reasonable for what work or artistic product? Regards, MM _______________________________________________ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
