On Sat, November 18, 2006 7:31 pm, Bob La Quey wrote: > On 11/18/06, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> >> My solution to the copyright dilemma is to grant it for 20 years >> after >> >> initial publication to the original producer without charge and >> without >> >> filing. After that, an increasing scale of payments is required to >> >> renew it. Say, double the price every 10 years. No upper limit. >> > >> > How did you get 20 years? Why not 5? Why not zero? >> >> Arbitrary number based on rough estimate. Creative works often take >> time to enter the broad public consciousness. 20 years seems like a >> good balance. > > Thomas Jefferson's preference for the term of copyright was 19 years, > based on actuarial calculations. See > > http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/7/23/23214/3438 > > which has a good discussion between some very bright > guys (Jefferson, Madison ... ) about the core questions. > > BobLQ >
It shouldn't be forgotten that copyright was introduced to protect authors. In the 18th century, printers bought first editions of popular authors' works, reset them, and started publishing them at a discount. It was seen as outright theft, copyright laws were passed, and I mostly agree with them. The need for that protection is still there. Except that it's become ridiculous. Sonny Bono in his brief and completely undistinguished career in Congress introduced the Mickey Mouse Protection Act and we were off to the races. All you zealots of the free market will have to explain to me someday why your boys decided it was "free" to keep extending copyright on and on and on ... One reform I'd like to see is, when a copyright is transferred from the ownership of the original author, a unextendable 15 year clock immediately begins to tick on it. -- Lan Barnes Tcl/Tk Enthusiast SCM Analyst Linux Guy Biodiesel Brewer -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
