New York Times, January 16, 2003
The Coming of Copyright Perpetuity
In 1998 Congress was the scene of a battle over
public domain, the public right of common, free and unrestricted use of
artistic works whose copyright has expired. Corporations like Disney,
organizations like the Motion Picture Association of America, and dead
artists' families wanted to extend copyright. Advocates of public domain
wanted to leave copyright protection as it was, which would have allowed
many early 20th-century works, including corporate creations like Mickey
Mouse, to slip into the public domain. The copyright owners won, and
yesterday they won again when the Supreme Court, by a vote of 7 to 2,
decided that Congress was within its constitutional rights when it
extended copyright. The court's decision may make constitutional sense,
but it does not serve the public well.
Under that 1998 act, copyright now extends for the life of an artist plus
70 years. Copyrights owned by corporations run for 95 years. Since the
Constitution grants Congress the right to authorize copyright for
"limited times," even the opponents of an extended term were
not hopeful that the Supreme Court would rule otherwise. This decision
almost certainly prepares the way for more bad copyright extension laws
in the future. Congress has lengthened copyright 11 times in the past 40
years.
Artists naturally deserve to hold a property interest in their work, and
so do the corporate owners of copyright. But the public has an equally
strong interest in seeing copyright lapse after a time, returning works
to the public domain the great democratic seedbed of artistic creation
where they can be used without paying royalties.
In effect, the Supreme Court's decision makes it likely that we are
seeing the beginning of the end of public domain and the birth of
copyright perpetuity. Public domain has been a grand experiment, one that
should not be allowed to die. The ability to draw freely on the entire
creative output of humanity is one of the reasons we live in a time of
such fruitful creative ferment.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/16/opinion/16THU2.html?tntemail0
---
You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected]
