Slashdot Mirror
The Case For Perpetual Copyright
Several readers sent in a link to an op-ed in the NYTimes by novelist Mark Halprin, who lays out the argument for what amounts to perpetual copyright. He says that anything less is essentially an unfair public taking of property: "No good case exists for the inequality of real and intellectual property, because no good case can exist for treating with special disfavor the work of the spirit and the mind." This community can surely supply a plethora of arguments for the public domain, words which don't appear in the op-ed. In a similar vein, reader benesch sends us to the BBC for a tale of aging pop performers (virtually) serenading Parliament in favor of extending copyright for recording artists in the UK. Some performers are likely to outlive the current protections, now fixed at a mere 50 years.
Update: 05/20 22:50 GMT by KD : Podcaster writes to let us know that the copyright reform community is crafting a reply over at Lawrence Lessig's wiki.
Update: 05/20 22:50 GMT by KD : Podcaster writes to let us know that the copyright reform community is crafting a reply over at Lawrence Lessig's wiki.
I believe the author of this article is right. I think its fair to have perpetual Copy write. The work that that artist went through to create the work needs to be recognized. Its a compilation of words yes but words are his tool for creating his art. Would you deny a painter or his decedents the right to make money just because he didn't make the paint he used. Its the same thing. Furthermore I feel that copy write has had a bad shake recently with all the piracy going on today. Music, movies, computer programs, and books are being copied all the time. Not enough is being done to stop it. I feel people have a right to make a living off their work if they so choose to do so. So do their children and grand children if their work goes beyond their life.
Think about the effect this would have on book publishers too. They would be forced to look for new talent more vigorously then they have because eventually the copy write for older works will be unmanageable. This would give more opportunity for younger artists trying to make a living. This would be a good thing all around.
I want to point something out though. Although I feel this way about copy writable material. I don't agree with it with patents. Patents should be a limited thing. They offer too much protection in some cases for inventions.