Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
Copyright is a valuable and necessary protection, and anyone who thinks otherwise just isn't thinking.
But how long should copyright last? That's the issue. Seventy years past the author's death is an incredibly long time, and I'm not sure how it's in anyone's best interest. Most authors' works will go out of print long before copyright expires, so even the heirs are not benefitting. It makes more sense to let works into the public domain after a reasonable amount of time--I'd say something like 50 years after first publication, or 25 years after the author's death, whichever is later.
|
Time is relative, look, in about ten years maybe less, EVERYONE who wants one will have access to a cheap, disposable ereader that is connected to the global network. Does anyone here believe that they have the right to restrict access to the network to anyone?? The medium is the message, the network is the content.
We DEFINITELY NEED to start imagining new ways to distribute content and PAY the content creators, so that they can eat.
Small autonomous groups of creators/editors/distributors might be the way to go, but still lurking in the background is the problem of what to do about people who want to access "YOUR" content but cannot or choose not to pay you for the content.
Some governments require a copy of every book published within their governmental boundaries to be sent to a central depository so that the public has at least a modicum of access to the book. I feel that an expansion of this system, covering the entire network is a possibility for the future. Especially now that it is easier than ever before to make these copies available to anyone who wishes to access them. Because it can be done, so it will be done.
What harm is there in the free sharing of information? Certainly there are those who will misuse the information, either for their own benefit, or to the detriment of others, but our systems should NOT BE DESIGNED around the actions of these behavioral anomalies.