The "Copyright Black Hole" Swallowing Our Culture

An anonymous reader writes "James Boyle, professor at Duke Law School, has a piece in the Financial Times in which he argues that a 'copyright black hole is swallowing our culture.' He explains some of the issues surrounding Google Books, and makes the point that these issues wouldn't exist if we had a sane copyright law. Relatedly, in recent statements to the still-skeptical European Commission, Google has defended their book database by saying that it helps to make the Internet democratic. Others have noted that the database could negatively affect some researchers for whom a book's subject matter isn't always why they read it."

Comments

there will never be violent demonstrations

[circletimessquare]

something like pharmaceutical research: if someone patented the cure to say, breast cancer, and then forced anyone who wanted to live to pay $50,000, there WOULD be violence, since the cost of ridiculous IP laws would be rendered starkly and clearly in suffering and lives lost. so that's why patents have such limited time range, since their effects on society are stark and clear

with copyrights, the effect isn't as stark: the impoverishment of our cultural existence isn't something you can easily equate to a pound of flesh. and so, since copyright isn't rendered in easy to understand blood and physical suffering, copyright has been allowed to be extended to ridiculous lengths

the REAL lesson for us, and companies (if they would ever listen) is that the pharmaceutical industry is a multibillion dollar healthy vibrant industry.... without the ridiculous IP protections. so if the pharamacuetical industry can swing it, why can't the book publishers/ music industry swing it?

short answer: they CAN make healthy income with only 15 year, 10 year copyrights. but no one protests the abusive, culture destroying IP laws they've rammed through with the support of assholes like sonny bono (rip), like they would protest if pfizer tried to gouge every MLS sufferer for $100,000 for decades, becase the cost with patents is easy to understand in terms of the cost to society, while the cost to society of copyright is more vague: a less culturally rich life for all of us