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.
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.
<snip>
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.
being the devils advocate :D
so going along with the thread: I get 20 years, and I can extend it, but now
if I sell it the new buyer cant, that really hozes ME!! I dont market
anything I do, I sell things to people who will do that for me, now they
would know that they have a fixed timetable and that the clock is ticking
.... they might or probibly more acurately will be less inclined to spend $
and Ill be less inclined to create my next new work of ....
isnt the point of copyrights that it encourages people to do things, and
protecting the creator or at least initial holder of copyright
this is even more pressed in when someone takes a picture of an area for
money, with the intent in selling it to a developer, the picture has more
value at different times, say when major renovation is being done, or
politics steps in. the origional photographer is banking on that major
renovation, now not only does he/she have to get everything right to get
that picture, but also has to hope that either renovation or politics steps
in in less than 15 years. By allowing the extension the photographer will
make his money because the picture has value for the "grand opening", and
would be sold so it could be used then, but it also has value when someone
wants to build a prison next to the building, and again when finding funding
for say the 13th floor.
just trying to kick up some dust, yet knowing something has to change!
Richard Reynolds
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
