Read Lessig's Free Culture http://www.free-culture.cc/freeculture.pdf for a large number of well-reasoned responses, as well as numerous examples of the culture-squashing nature of existing copyright law.
"The Lion King 4" may or may not be a worthy work to hypothesize the existence of -- in the hands of one artist, it might be crap. In the hands of another, it might transcend all possible boundaries, far surpassing the Disney creation from which it was inspired. But unfortunately, no one will know until the year 2089 (1994 + 95 years). (That is, of course, unless the Disney Empire manages to get that extended further.)
Within the span of, say, 7-14 years from a creation's origin, it does seems a bit hard to argue with the original intent of copyright. But I can imagine even your facetious example being quite differently perceived in another decade or two. Certainly in nine.
I think the worst offenses on modern culture are probably against the youth remix/mashup community -- I've seen some incredible acts of creativity that basically can't be shared. They are for all practical purposes illegal, unless the artists go out of their way to claim "fair use" and take their chances with a lawsuit. The biggest offenses against legitimate fair use are the abuse of power and greed by these same corporations -- there are numerous documentarians who have not had the legal resources available to defend their fair use in court. Their creativity has been limited by corporate power in the name of copyright, even though their fair use is valid and legal. It's a matter of David and Goliath, and who knows what cultural significance we have lost when they are too afraid of being sued to create, or limit their vision out of the necessity of that fear. (The "Simpsons" clip incident in Lessig's book comes to mind, where Fox studio execs wanted $10,000 for a license to use a four-and-a-half second clip showing a episode of Matt Groening's "The Simpsons" on a tiny TV in the corner of a shot. Obviously fair use, yet squashed by the threat of legal action.)
To answer you directly: There is really no telling what the impact on our culture has been -- how the benefits to our culture have been reduced since the extension of copyright. We can't really know what numerous works of creative genius we have been denied.
Again, read Free Culture and see what you think after that sobering/insightful document.
While we're all spending time here grumbling about it, how about spending 2 minutes contacting your representative -- Support Rick Boucher and John Doolittle's FAIR Use Act, which is a good first step at removing some of the entertainment industry's most draconian anti-innovation weapons and chipping away at the DMCA's broad restrictions on fair use. Take action now and tell your representative to help restore balance in copyright now: http://action.eff.org/site/Advocacy?id=271
Slashdot Mirror
Read Lessig's Free Culture http://www.free-culture.cc/freeculture.pdf for a large number of well-reasoned responses, as well as numerous examples of the culture-squashing nature of existing copyright law.
"The Lion King 4" may or may not be a worthy work to hypothesize the existence of -- in the hands of one artist, it might be crap. In the hands of another, it might transcend all possible boundaries, far surpassing the Disney creation from which it was inspired. But unfortunately, no one will know until the year 2089 (1994 + 95 years). (That is, of course, unless the Disney Empire manages to get that extended further.)
Within the span of, say, 7-14 years from a creation's origin, it does seems a bit hard to argue with the original intent of copyright. But I can imagine even your facetious example being quite differently perceived in another decade or two. Certainly in nine.
I think the worst offenses on modern culture are probably against the youth remix/mashup community -- I've seen some incredible acts of creativity that basically can't be shared. They are for all practical purposes illegal, unless the artists go out of their way to claim "fair use" and take their chances with a lawsuit. The biggest offenses against legitimate fair use are the abuse of power and greed by these same corporations -- there are numerous documentarians who have not had the legal resources available to defend their fair use in court. Their creativity has been limited by corporate power in the name of copyright, even though their fair use is valid and legal. It's a matter of David and Goliath, and who knows what cultural significance we have lost when they are too afraid of being sued to create, or limit their vision out of the necessity of that fear. (The "Simpsons" clip incident in Lessig's book comes to mind, where Fox studio execs wanted $10,000 for a license to use a four-and-a-half second clip showing a episode of Matt Groening's "The Simpsons" on a tiny TV in the corner of a shot. Obviously fair use, yet squashed by the threat of legal action.)
To answer you directly: There is really no telling what the impact on our culture has been -- how the benefits to our culture have been reduced since the extension of copyright. We can't really know what numerous works of creative genius we have been denied.
Again, read Free Culture and see what you think after that sobering/insightful document.
While we're all spending time here grumbling about it, how about spending 2 minutes contacting your representative -- Support Rick Boucher and John Doolittle's FAIR Use Act, which is a good first step at removing some of the entertainment industry's most draconian anti-innovation weapons and chipping away at the DMCA's broad restrictions on fair use. Take action now and tell your representative to help restore balance in copyright now: http://action.eff.org/site/Advocacy?id=271