We're going to have a panel discussion about this and other issues on copyright during the SFC Conference at New York Law School on April 20-21! Should be nice to see how we can push the copyright discussion forward (from a FC perspective).
Cheers, Jennifer On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Wilhelmina Randtke <[email protected]>wrote: > Counter argument that was not tried before: > > - Copyright under the constitution requires both (1) originality and (2) > fixation. "Fixed in a tangible medium of expression" isn't as developed, > but it's there. This is why antibootlegging (recording live music without > the performer's knowledge) is done under the Commerce Clause, not the > Copyright Clause. Because the creator has to be involved in fixing the > original expression in some tangible medium. > > - If an artwork isn't both original and also fixed in some form, then it > isn't subject to copyright. The Copyright Clause of the constitution can't > apply. > > - Since the 1850's paper tends to be printed with acid levels that give it > a maximum lifespan of about 100 years. This is because the sizing (stuff > that keeps ink from feathering) is done with alum rosin. Studies on paper > permanency are available. Film has a slightly shorter lifespan. > > - The argument is that the lifespan of the physical media sets a maximum > limit on the duration of copyright. If an artwork has a set amount of time > that fixation will last, then that sets a maximum limit on the copyright. > > Here's long explanation: > http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1908318 > > > Decaying paper easier to understand than an economic argument based on > math. Decay is less speculative than future profits. A book made in 1923, > on alum rosin sized paper, is now approaching the end of its life. Acid in > the pages will continue to oxidize, not on a straight line, but at an > increasing rate along a curve, and the pages (probably already brittle and > easily broken by folding) will eventually turn to ashes and crumble due to > acid in the pages. > > To see this for yourself, you can take an old book, and crease the corner > of the page. If the paper breaks along that crease, then that book is near > the end of it's lifespan. Nothing will change that. It is impossible to > reverse the brittleness. There is no unseen mathmatical factor, like in > economics. It's going to happen. > > If copyrights are extended, then for the first time in US history, the > duration of copyright will exceed the lifespan of a mass produced sheet of > paper, and hence of the average book. > > > What other arguments have people developed this past decade? > > -Wilhelmina Randtke > > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 1:02 PM, David Riordan <[email protected]>wrote: > >> A Bloomberg >> article<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-29/a-free-market-fix-for-the-copyright-racket.html>about >> the RSC's pulled copyright reform report just got me thinking... >> >> Back in 1998, almost 14 years ago, Congress passed the Mickey Mouse Sonny >> Bono Copyright Term Extension >> Act<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act>, >> which took all works then covered under copyright in the United States and >> retroactively tacked another 20 years of monopoly before they would reach >> the public domain. Works that would have reached the public domain in 1998 >> got a stay of execution from the hands of *the public* –* those unwashed* >> *masses* – until a date far, far in the future, 2018. >> >> *Wait - that's like six years away! That's pretty soon!* >> >> We haven't talked much about copyright term extension since Larry Lessig >> lost us >> <http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/March-April-2004/story_lessig_marapr04.msp> >> *Eldred v. >> Ashcroft<http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/March-April-2004/story_lessig_marapr04.msp> >> * and got these retroactive copyright term extensions enshrined as >> constitutional as a side effect. So now, for copyrighted works to enter the >> public domain, Free Culture advocates really have only one form of >> recourse, blocking term extensions. >> >> We don't know when this extension movement will begin (its early stages >> are likely being planned now), but we know it's inevitable. Consequently, >> we should begin to prepare our counter-argument now so we're ready when it >> comes. Who knows, we may soon have a strong base of support on the >> right<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-29/a-free-market-fix-for-the-copyright-racket.html> >> (which >> will have the delicious side effect of causing Democrats like me an >> existential crisis), which would bring some serious firepower to the fight. >> >> Otherwise, the 115th Congress might be the one to realize Sonny Bono's >> dream, as so eloquently put by his widow, Mary Bono on the floor of the >> House of >> Representatives<http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1998-10-07/pdf/CREC-1998-10-07-pt1-PgH9946.pdf#page=7> >> back >> in 1998: >> >> Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever. I am >> informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution. I >> invite all of you to work with me to strengthen our copyright laws in all >> of the ways available to us. As you know, there is also Jack Valenti’s >> proposal for term to last forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may >> look at that next Congress. >> >> >> -- >> David W. Riordan >> -- >> mobile: 203.521.1222 | im: daveriordan | email: [email protected]| >> @riordan <http://twitter.com/riordan> | http://magicschoolb.us >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freeculture.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
