I think I've read the entire thread now, so let me say that I generally agree with Fred's take on this one. TOT is a non-waiveable entitlement in the U.S. It exists. Either CC talks about it or it doesn't. If it doesn't we lose the marginal copyright holders who would terminate and re-license under CC. If it does it loses both the marginal CC users who decide to un-CC and the increased systemic costs that un-CC'ing may create. Which of these two options (talking or not talking) is more beneficial is largely an empirical question, but once we are aware of TOT we cannot simply ignore it. Personally I think there is way more benefit to be found in the first than cost in the second, but this is only my hunch.
I should also point out that TOT only affects a reversion of U.S. rights. Those of you outside of the U.S. should not worry unless your local governments have similar laws. Which is to say that were a CC license actually terminated (hypothetically of course, because as Larry has pointed out it would be very, very hard to serve adequate notice; there are other problems, too, but i won't bore you here) it would only mean that the author would regain rights in the U.S. My guess is this would dramatically reduce the incentive for a CC author to terminate, but that is only a guess. Who would pay for a work when they could still get it for free in/from france? If any, would the expected revenue be greater than the expected cost of terminating? Greater than the costs of terminating with the CC tool, but not without it? Anyway, I still fail to see why an author who has demonstrated a desire to join the commons would even want to terminate, but I concede there may be a few of them. Dana _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
