RE: [dvd-discuss] Reason magazine: patents and copyrights are superfluous

["Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

Since copyright for works with multiple
authors is measured by life of the last
surviving author ... what would stop me
from crediting my son (currently 3 years
old) as a "co author"?


-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!



> -----Original Message-----
> From: microlenz@earthlink.net [mailto:microlenz@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 1:18 PM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Reason magazine: patents and copyrights are
> superfluous
> 
> 
> All of which becomes self limiting if the term is 
> short...."Fifty is nifty but 
> 28 is great"
> 
> At this point maybe copyright should be for the lifetime of 
> the author provided 
> he keeps the copyright and that he can only lease it for a 
> fixed term of say 7 
> years. If he sells it it becomes a mere commodity and expires 
> at the end of 28 
> years.
> 
> I'm afraid that there will be no copyright reform until the 
> copyright holders 
> BEG for 50 flat and settle for 28yrs. Intellectual property 
> has become 
> intellectual slavery...
> 
> On 22 Feb 2003 at 11:41, Jeremy Erwin wrote:
> 
> Date sent:      	Sat, 22 Feb 2003 11:41:02 -0500
> Subject:        	[dvd-discuss] Reason magazine: patents 
> and copyrights are superfluous
> From:           	Jeremy Erwin <jerwin@ponymail.com>
> To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> 
> > Some on this mailing list may be interested in and/or amused by a 
> > recent Reason piece ( 
http://www.reason.com/0303/fe.dc.creation.shtml 
> ), describing a recent economic paper (Boldrin and Levine. 2002, 
> "Perfectly Competitive Innovation" , 
> http://www.dklevine.com/papers/pci23.pdf ) that notes " Copyrights, 
> patents, and similar government-granted rights serve only to reinforce 
> monopoly control, with its attendant damages of inefficiently high 
> prices, low quantities, and stifled future innovation,"
> 
> 
> Jeremy
>