Slashdot Mirror


Eternal Copyright: a Modest Proposal

New submitter SpockLogic writes "The Telegraphs has a tongue in cheek essay in praise of eternal copyright by the founder of an online games company. Quoting: 'Imagine you're a new parent at 30 years old and you've just published a bestselling new novel. Under the current system, if you lived to 70 years old and your descendants all had children at the age of 30, the copyright in your book – and thus the proceeds – would provide for your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and great-great-grandchildren. But what, I ask, about your great-great-great-grandchildren? What do they get? How can our laws be so heartless as to deny them the benefit of your hard work in the name of some do-gooding concept as the "public good," simply because they were born a mere century and a half after the book was written? After all, when you wrote your book, it sprung from your mind fully-formed, without requiring any inspiration from other creative works – you owe nothing at all to the public. And what would the public do with your book, even if they had it? Most likely, they'd just make it worse.'"

31 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Are you crazy?!? by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Funny

    You call it sarcasm, they call it talking points. Stop giving them ideas, asshole!!

    1. Re:Are you crazy?!? by bondsbw · · Score: 4, Funny

      Who said anything about "giving" ideas? Those things cost money, you know.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    2. Re:Are you crazy?!? by Phat_Tony · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Snow White (1937), Fantasia (1940), Pinocchio (1940), Dumbo (1941), Bambi (1942), Song of the South (1946), Cinderella (1950), Alice in Wonderland (1951), Robin Hood (1952), Peter Pan (1953), Lady and the Tramp (1955), Mulan (1998), Sleeping Beauty (1959), 101 Dalmatians (1961), The Sword in the Stone (1963), The Jungle Book (1967).

      Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse's first success, was a parody of Buster Keaton's Steamboat Bill.

      And this entire comment is taken from Lawrence Lessig's work Free Culture, let's hope he doesn't issue a DMCA takedown notice for this comment ;)

      --
      Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
  2. Another way of eternity by Hentes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Copyright technically won't be eternal, but its duration increases linearly over time in a way that it never ends.

    1. Re:Another way of eternity by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, it will definitely end. About 70 years after the last human died.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:Another way of eternity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, it will definitely end. About 70 years after the last human died.

      you think copyright will be ended by the extinction of the human race?

      oh you poor naive sod, there are plans for that.

    3. Re:Another way of eternity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think it's odd that the Ouhg family is still seeing the benefits of the 'wheel' patent.

    4. Re:Another way of eternity by Timex · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, it will definitely end. About 70 years after the last lawyer died.

      There. FTFY.

      --
      When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
    5. Re:Another way of eternity by meerling · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, cockroaches have more ethics than that :)

  3. And not one mention by Master+Moose · · Score: 4, Funny

    I kept waiting for the baby eating, but it never happened.

    --
    . . .gone when the morning comes
    1. Re:And not one mention by mounthood · · Score: 4, Funny

      I kept waiting for the baby eating, but it never happened.

      Are you suggesting that the author should have copied someone else's work?

      --
      tomorrow who's gonna fuss
  4. Re:Please be satire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    If it's called "A Modest Proposal", that means it is satire:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_modest_proposal

    Admittedly, it seems like every new class of student that reads it has some in it that thing Swift actually wanted to eat babies...

  5. Re:The Article by nedlohs · · Score: 4, Funny

    Clearly you didn't read it, or you can't read.

    Since it had such a jab...

  6. Re:On the other hand... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Funny

    Socialist! Is a man not entitled to the sweat from his great-great-great-grandfather's brow?!

  7. Micky Mouse Copyright by wonderboss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What we really need is a special copyright for Mickey and the rest of the Disney characters
    so that The Walt Disney Company can stop lobbying to extend all copyrights.

    --
    more cowbell
    1. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What we really need is a special copyright for Mickey and the rest of the Disney characters...

      It's called Trademark, and once Disney realised they could have just Trademarked the mouse instead, they laughed about how needless yet simple it was to crush out and poison the public domain from which Walt's famous works initially sprang.

    2. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by jcrb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What we really need is a special copyright for Mickey and the rest of the Disney characters
      so that The Walt Disney Company can stop lobbying to extend all copyrights.

      I've said the same thing many times, but sadly it would never happen.

      But suddenly you make me think of something that might work Reset all copyright terms back to something simple like 50 years from publication. BUT, you can extend the copyright for as long as you want for a payment each year of

        $1 Million + $100,000 * years over 50 since publication , (in inflation adjusted dollars)

      so $1M at year 50, $1.5M at 55, $2M at 60, and so on

      If you have Winnie he Pooh, you can pay for as long is it makes sense to do so, if something has little value it will go into the public domain at 50 years.

      The money collected for the copyright extensions can be first directed to scanning everything the Library of Congress or any other library has to be put online so that it really does go to the public domain.

      --
      -jon
    3. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Starting from year one the copyright costs $1 and doubles every year. So year 2 is $2, year 3 is $4, etc.

    4. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by need4mospd · · Score: 5, Informative
      I like this plan. Copyright fees would cross $1,000,000 by 20 years.

      If Disney was to renew their Mickey Mouse copyright this year, it would cost them $19,342,813,113,834,066,795,298,816.

    5. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by gman003 · · Score: 3

      They have. The character is protected by trademark, not copyright. Only the films themselves require copyright - and for some reason, Disney wants the original, pre-WW2 cartoons kept out of public domain. It's not like they're making much, if any, money off them right now... I'm not even sure they're not in the Vault.

    6. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by _xeno_ · · Score: 5, Interesting

      they laughed about how needless yet simple it was to crush out and poison the public domain from which Walt's famous works initially sprang.

      Incidentally, if you think Disney is done ripping off the public domain, then you've missed John Carter. Wondering why on Earth Disney would create a film about a Civil War vet who is sent to Mars to save the Princess of Helium?

      Because it's based on the now public domain A Princess of Mars .

      Disney is, to this day, still profiting off the public domain, while refusing to allow anything they have made to ever enter it.

      I'm sure you're all completely shocked to discover that. Completely.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    7. Re:Micky Mouse Copyright by _xeno_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Though to be fair, after reading the John carter wikipedia page, it does appear that they actually purchased the rights to this one back in the early 80s.

      I'm not clear on why, but I just realized that the author of the original books was Edgar Rice Burroughs, and - well, he created a company to manage licensing his works which apparently still sues people for using Tarzan. Trying to find more info on that discovered several articles about Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. suing comic book companies for using Tarzan and John Carter himself.

      So presumably we're talking trademark rights, and not copyright rights, since the movie covers only public domain books. Which also demonstrates quite nicely how trademark can be used to extend copyright well beyond the death of the author, since Edgar Rice Burroughs died over 60 years ago. And it's being used to extract royalties for making a movie based on public domain works.

      Probably. Who knows, except the lawyers who worked out whatever rights we're talking about.

      So maybe this is Disney being hoist with their own petard?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  8. There is to much abandonware as there is now by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is to much abandonware as there is now and the last thing we need is longer copyrights that will let to most lost software / books / movies that should be in the open but can't be due to copyrights.

  9. I'm all for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm all for eternal copyright. However, after a certain amount of time (say 20-30 years or so), you would have to start paying a fee to the government to maintain your copyright. This fee would increase at an exponential rate for every year after that. This way companies that have a valuable copyrights could hold on to it for at least some time, but the vast majority of creative works would be converted to public domain within a reasonable time frame.

    (I also think patents could work similarly, except that the exponential fees would start at say 3-5 years and with a fixed timelimit of 20 years after which the patent will expire.)

    1. Re:I'm all for it by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I say start it immediately, at $1. Then double it each year. Math so simple, even Congress can understand it.

      In a decade, it'll cost just over a grand a year. By two decades, it'll be costing over a million. Even 30+-year copyrights would be possible, if they were worth billions of dollars to whoever owned them.

      This would also allow for near-immediate entry into the public domain of works by extinct companies. Abandonware would flourish - when a company goes bankrupt, unless their copyrights get bought up, their products would enter the public domain within a year.

  10. Re:The author is a neuroscientist and he can't add by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sheldon, mathematical liberties are allowed when used in hyperbole.

  11. Re:Please be satire by danbert8 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a new disciplinary policy I'd like to institute called "No Child's Left Behind". You spank them, but you can only hit their right butt cheek.

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
  12. Comments as a derivative work. by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While considering this most modest proposal of 'eternal copy rite' I think we should also take pause to consider another terrible form of piracy so frequent today. That of creating a body of work, that's soul purpose is the critique of an existing piece of work. Obviously any monetary benefit derived from such a work , would not exist without the author of the original work. So much so that such works are derivative works par excellent of the original. Since the comments are bound to do nothing more then make the original less useful and worse then it's initially concise and proper format the author should retain control over Removing or modifying any comments not fully in the spirit of the original.

    After all, all freedoms have limits , and freedom of speech certainly is of a lower value then an authors freedom to create wealth and provide a viable income to her/himself and future descendants.

    --
    âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
  13. LO and BEHOLD ! by nu1x · · Score: 3, Funny

    The first archeologist to discover the copyrighted works of humanity will be summarily executed by Automated Copyright Enforcement Mechanism.

    --
    I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
  14. Re:Please be satire by Larryish · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can call it what it really is:

    No Child Permitted to Excel

  15. Re:Please be satire by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a parent of a gifted child, I've got to echo this sentiment. If your child is falling behind, there are lots of resources to help them catch up. Now there's nothing wrong with that, per sec, but if your child is craving more intellectual stimulation, you have virtually no recourse. (And, if your bored child starts acting up, your child could get labeled as a problem child when all they really need is more academic challenges.)

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.