[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'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Must Copyright terms be uniform?
- From: "Ballowe, Charles" <CBallowe(at)usg.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:22:49 -0600
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnold G. Reinhold [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Must Copyright terms be uniform?
> I think one could get the same effect by requiring affirmative action
> to renew a copyright, like we had 50 years ago. I would have been
> more comfortable with all the copyright duration extensions if there
> was a substantial fee (say $100/yr) required to extend a term. Highly
> valuable copyrights (Mickey Mouse, Gone With the Wind, etc.) would
> see their terms lengthened, but the vast majority of material would
> enter the public domain much sooner.
Interesting thought -- why not make the fee something like 1% of revenue
generated but the work? (only applying this to extensions beyond some
reasonable base term (20 yrs?)) That way, even if they don't become
public domain, the works can still serve some public interest.