TechCrunch: Rampant Piracy Will Be The Kindle DX's Savior

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The majority of things published by the US government are in the public domain, so seemingly it is be possible to do it.

What SirBruce said. Works published by the US Gov't are automatically in the public domain. Certain other works may be automatically in the public domain. But there's no legal process for releasing a copyrighted work into the public domain--announcing "this book/song I wrote is in the public domain" is almost certainly not enough. There's no place to officially announce it, no person or organization who keeps records of "content added to the public domain."

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

What SirBruce said. Works published by the US Gov't are automatically in the public domain. Certain other works may be automatically in the public domain. But there's no legal process for releasing a copyrighted work into the public domain--announcing "this book/song I wrote is in the public domain" is almost certainly not enough. There's no place to officially announce it, no person or organization who keeps records of "content added to the public domain."

You could place it under a creative commons license with no restrictions.

Dale

[Jaime_Astorga]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

You could place it under a creative commons license with no restrictions.

Dale

I was gonna suggest that too. Nothing like a good Creative Commons license for releasing works into the wild while still retaining attribution (and a couple of other things if one sees fit to do it).

http://creativecommons.org/license/

[drogo]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Jaime:
Copyright in the US is an explicit trade: Content creators get a temporary limited property right in the content they create, thus "ensuring" that they have the opportunity to profit from their work. In exchange, all content enters the public domain on expiration of copyright. The key idea -- which is explicitly stated in the Constitution, by the way -- is that the opportunity for profit is intended to provide an incentive for content creators (writers, artists, programmers, etc.) to create more content. For the creators, it's a chance to make more money. For the public, it's a chance both to have paid access to the content early on, and free access to the content later.

Thus, here in the US, if you are "pirating" content you are reneging on the Public's side of the deal by failing to compensate the creator according to the terms he has set. That's the "[...] property right" part above. Libraries, access for the blind and disabled, and fair-use access fall under the "limited" part of "limited property right."

Works expiring into the public domain?? Oh my. Thank you. After all this work I've done today, I needed a good laugh like that.

I'm sorry, I think you (and other authors) deserve to get paid for you work, but this idea of "an agreement" has long since been shot to heck. You will never see anything enter the public domain. I will never see anything enter the public domain. This "agreement" you speak of is simply theoretical. It's never really going to happen. As was previously stated, copyright is up to life +70 years. Copyright started at 14 yrs, and was renewable once. Unless the laws are repealed (which, let's face it, never happens) nothing will ever move into the public domain again. As each previously established time frame for items to pass into it came due, the time frame was extended. And when life+70 comes along for the first big-name item with attorneys to fight for it, it'll get extended again.

The public domain is dead. Shrinking, really. Snow White is a public domain story, try doing your own movie-version of that and see how it goes.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by drogo

Works expiring into the public domain?? Oh my. Thank you. After all this work I've done today, I needed a good laugh like that.

I'm sorry, I think you (and other authors) deserve to get paid for you work, but this idea of "an agreement" has long since been shot to heck. You will never see anything enter the public domain. I will never see anything enter the public domain. This "agreement" you speak of is simply theoretical. It's never really going to happen. As was previously stated, copyright is up to life +70 years. Copyright started at 14 yrs, and was renewable once. Unless the laws are repealed (which, let's face it, never happens) nothing will ever move into the public domain again. As each previously established time frame for items to pass into it came due, the time frame was extended. And when life+70 comes along for the first big-name item with attorneys to fight for it, it'll get extended again.

The public domain is dead. Shrinking, really. Snow White is a public domain story, try doing your own movie-version of that and see how it goes.

I've posted many times that I disagree very strongly with the ever-extending term of copyright. It's gone too far, and needs to be whacked back to something sensible. But that's not necessarily a reason to pitch the entire idea, when it can be fixed with a smaller change (e.g. terms that actually end within a reasonable period). Of course we can (and probably should) argue about what that reasonable period might be. If you search on my posts, you'll find several discussions of ideas to that end.

Xenophon

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

I've posted many times that I disagree very strongly with the ever-extending term of copyright. It's gone too far, and needs to be whacked back to something sensible. But that's not necessarily a reason to pitch the entire idea, when it can be fixed with a smaller change (e.g. terms that actually end within a reasonable period). Of course we can (and probably should) argue about what that reasonable period might be. If you search on my posts, you'll find several discussions of ideas to that end.

Sure, but the other party is lobbying for changes in the opposite direction at the same time, and they seem to be winning.
What cutoff point is there for copyright to become entirely unreasonable? Life+100? I find the current setup pretty outlandish already, especially since changes made in the USA sadly also affect my country's, if only because they only start lobbying harder over here when they're able to claim that "it's been done overthere as well". Never mind ACTA

[drogo]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

I've posted many times that I disagree very strongly with the ever-extending term of copyright. It's gone too far, and needs to be whacked back to something sensible. But that's not necessarily a reason to pitch the entire idea, when it can be fixed with a smaller change (e.g. terms that actually end within a reasonable period). Of course we can (and probably should) argue about what that reasonable period might be. If you search on my posts, you'll find several discussions of ideas to that end.

Xenophon

Ah, then we're largely in agreement. I don't read that many threads here, so I was unaware of your stance. However, to be fair (to me ), nowhere in my post did I advocate that we "pitch the entire idea". I'd like to see something along the lines of the original 14+14 for books & movies, with something shorter for software. Improving the breed by standing on the shoulders of giants if you will.

I disagreed with the original statement you made in that you're holding someone to an agreement that's completely one-sided. Admonishments due to depriving authors of hard-earned remunerations are certainly in order, but even you'd have to agree that the side of the "agreement" intended to benefit the public is largely non-existent.

edit:duplicate word.