Cary Bass wrote: > On 06/30/2010 05:44 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >> I shouldn't use the work "luck" however in this case, since it >> implies you didn't bring it upon yourself. How about this >> counter-offensive. Threaten to repeal copyright to the point, >> where any holder *only* gets ten years. That's it. Ten years to >> make your money then it's public domain. We can call it the "Knock >> it off or else" proposal. >> >> > Ten years is an awfully short time[1]. > > [1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posthumous_fame_of_Vincent_van_Gogh> > > What good would even ten years have done for Van Gogh? Without a lot of promotion by Theo's wife, Vincent could very well have sunk into obscurity like so many artists habituating the streets of Montmartre. Vincent also had no children of his own. What needs to be revisited is the long term of copyright beyond a person's death. Who should really benefit at this point.
I would support a "use-it-or-lose-it" after the initial ten year period. If the owner doesn't make a previously published work available to the public at a reasonable price he should lose the copyright. Ray _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
