[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Must Copyright terms be uniform?
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Must Copyright terms be uniform?
- From: Jim Bauer <jfbauer(at)home.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 20:19:39 -0500
- In-Reply-To: <OF98ACE101.FEFC27B6-ON88256AFF.005FE519@aero.org>
- Newsgroups: local.dvd-discuss
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
Michael A Rolenz <Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org> wrote:
> The argument that
>works must enter into the public domain at 28yrs to be valid contemporay
>or relevant does not hold. There is no question that a short term is
>valuable for some of the things you discuss. The things you discuss are
>all what the author can do for society but NOT what society can do for the
>author that has enriched it so well. What reward are they deserving? Is
>50yrs such a burden on society? No more so than 28yrs. 50yrs gives the
>author the chance of some long term income and the possibility of
>providing some for his spouse and for a few years for his children. Does
>28? Not really. Does 35? maybe. Does 40? Possibly Does 50 most probably!
Would not a shorter copyright term (within reason) encourage more creative
works? If someone happens to create something very successful, with
long term copyrights, they can just sit back and cash the checks that
come in. They don't need to be creative anymore. If on the otherhand
they know it won't last forever, they may do something about it.
Jim Bauer, email@example.com