> From: "Alan Sargent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To any of those tired of this discussion: I promise to be non-flamey and extremely brief here, but there is a minor point or two that I think is important enough to merit mention. I believe the following is worth the time to read if you are anyone who creates copyrightable works with your computer, particularly if you do so for a living.
>> I said: >> Yes, but again this has NOTHING to do with the creator's death date. >> It >> extended the length of copyright *from the date of creation*. > To which Alan replied. > Sorry, wrong. For works for hire (probably most of your work), the > extension (Bono act) increases the copyright term from 75 (previously) > to > 95 years from creation. For individual authors, the term is extended > from > life of the author plus 50 years to life plus 70 years. > You are right, but I am also right here. You are right to clarify the Bono act's differences between work-for-hire limits and personal limits. But I am right when I say that the Bono act extends the length of copyright from the date of creation. When you say that the personal term is extended to "life plus 70 years," this is true. But the copyright applies only from the date of creation to the end of the author's life, not the entire length of the author's life. I have a feeling you, Alan, understand this, but not everyone may, so please let me give a short example and feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken here: In 2002, I create a work at the age of 40. I live another 40 years (ie 80 years old). The Bono Act nor any other law should be interpreted to mean that the copyright on my work lasts 80 years (the length of my life) plus another 70 years (total 150 years). The term is to be from the date of creation to the end of my life (40 years) plus another 70 years beyond my death, ie a total of 110 years. Just wanted to make sure everyone understood that. > For music, it would depend on whether the artist retained rights or > transferred them to a company which would apply. Most book authors > retain > individual rights. > Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you are speaking of Berne Convention or perhaps UK-specific law. In the US, almost every book is a work for hire -- owned by the publisher. The actual author usually has no rights at all to the characters or work itself, since the publisher is legally seen as the "owner" of the work -- though the rights to the emphemra of a work (ie anything not published for example notes or rough drafts, excised chapters et al) are often (but not always) retained by the author. Again, this is just for clarification. J.K. Rowling, UK author of the Harry Potter books, has control of her characters and other rights, but American Tom Clancy for example has little control over what happens to his characters, that's all seen to by his publisher, the "owner" of the work. >>> This is currently being appealed at the Supreme Court. See >>> http://eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/eldredvashcroft/ >>> >> Let's be clear here: what is being challenged in court is a FURTHER >> extension of copyright for ANOTHER 20 years, aka the "Disney law." > > You're confused, the "Disney Law" IS aka the 1998 Bono act. I phrased that very badly, but I wasn't confused. I meant what you meant there. Sorry about my poor phrasing there, I can see how anyone would think I was talking about yet another extension when I wasn't. >>> Who creates the "LAW"? >> >> Er, legistators. Whether they operate in cahoots with big business >> these days is another matter altogether, > > No, it's exactly the point. Special interest groups actually draft a > lot of > legislation. > These days, yes. It used to be that legislators (even those with their own agendas) actually wrote most of the laws they "authored." Not anymore, I'm afraid. > No, I'm not an American. America applies its laws on the rest of the > world > by force of money/arms. > Well yes, and by our "monopoly power" as the "richest" and "most powerful" nation. Sucks, I know. Heh -- we are the Microsoft of nations! :) When I said "you didn't vote" I didn't mean "you, Alan" I meant "you, readers (mostly American) reading this" -- the public at large who care little about these issues but feel enormous impact from them. >> Nobody hates the DMCA more than me, BUT I don't hate it because I want >> to steal copyrighted material and the DMCA increases the incentives >> for > > Don't impute worse motives to me. > I absolutely did not mean to imply that *you* want to undermine/weaken/abolish the DMCA because you want to steal copyrighted material etc. If I gave anyone that impression it was strenuously NOT INTENDED and I apologise wholeheartedly if any poor phrasing on my part gave that impression. > I didn't say the state should confiscate estates. Only that they > should be > taxed. > I don't think I said or implied anything about comfiscating estates, and certainly didn't say that you endorse that idea. This is the first I've heard the notion. We agree that estates should be taxed. I was reacting to the idea put forth by either you or Dan's (not sure now) suggestion that a person's copyrighted works should be made public domain upon that person's death. I was trying to illustrate that doing such a thing *would* amount to the state comfiscating a person's property. > I hope I would have the courage to defy an unjust law, or at least > support > those that do. There's a huge gulf between an "unjust" law and an "unfair" or "damned inconvenient" one. Such things as region-encoding are examples of the latter two, not the former. _Chas_ Come to ... The CHASbah! http://thechasbah.blogspot.com Chas' CULTural Calendar (for Orlando): http://ical.mac.com/chasm/Chas'CULTuralCalendar -- The iMac List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | - Epson Stylus Color 580 Printers - new at $69 | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> iMac List info: <http://lowendmac.com/imac/list.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:imac-list@;mail.maclaunch.com> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:imac-list-off@;mail.maclaunch.com> For digest mode, email: <mailto:imac-list-digest@;mail.maclaunch.com> Subscription questions: <mailto:listmom@;lemlists.com> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/imac-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------- >The Think Different Store http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
