[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
- To: John Schulien <jms(at)uic.edu>
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Eldred Amicus
- From: Scott A Crosby <crosby(at)qwes.math.cmu.edu>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 18:52:27 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- In-reply-to: <3CF5B260.DDA16BB5@uic.edu>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
On Thu, 30 May 2002, John Schulien wrote:
> procedures. Renewal terms would be limited to
> 14 years, but instead of just one term, there
> might be several consecutive terms.
> Such a system would both protect authors
> from unscrupulous publishers -- by making
> copyright automatic on creation -- and also
> protect and expand the public domain by
> requiring a renewal action periodically -- thus
> eliminating abandoned or commercially worthless
> copyrights -- without resorting to common-law
> copyright to protect authors while they are
> shopping around manuscripts.
Its the commercially signifigant works that are likely to be the most
*desirable* works to be in the public domain. If it is commercially
signifigant 10-30 years after production, than that means that interest in
that work is still widespread, which means that that work is ideal
breeding ground for new perspectives and new ideas. (Gone with the Wind //
Wind Done Gone)
Yes, some works and authors only make it big after 30-40 years. So what?
If a work is popular that far in the future, its essentially a windfall
that the author could not have planned for nor expected when he/she/they
origionally created the work. Then there's the 20x reduction in value from
time-value-of-money consideratins. Copyright was never intended to
maximize the payoff of artistic creation.
If there's a choice between a (contemporarily) commercially signifigant
work and an unknown work of the same age... The commercially signifigant
work has many times the value were it in the public domain.