Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
Pardon me for being late to the de-bate, but my tinfoil hat was tuning things out.
I'm glad you brought up the Founding Fathers. What precisely did they say, and what precisely did they do? I'll let others quote the US Constitution, but they set both copyright and patent at 34 years maximum.
I'll make you a trade, (a deal deal, as Don Rickles said in Kelly's Heroes).
You sing the praises of 34 years max copyright, and I'll sing the praises of DRM. Fair enough?
And remember, the Golden Age of Hollywood was created iunder a max copyright of 56 years. Nobody was screaming "I can't/won't produce because my grandchildren won't have my copyright revenue in their retirement."
Or is this too tough for a K-Street Kommando?
|
Actually, I would make that trade. I agree that the current copyright term is too long. On the other hand, 34 years may be a bit short( life expectancy in in the 1780s was a little bit less than it is now). I'm Ok with 70 years or life of the author plus 20, whichever comes last. On the other hand, I agree that DRM could be improved. There should be a migration path if there is any change in DRM and you should be able to migrate your library to new devices. That's perfectly achievable under DRM.
Unfortunately, the digerati hand wave away the concerns of bestselling authors and publishers and demand unconditional surrender of their IP rights. Not surprisingly, the authors aren't interested.
K Street commando? I wish. Unfortunately, I'm just interested in reading good books and understand that the authors that produce them don't like being ripped off and won't continue working if they aren't protected from being ripped off. I notice that you and others have said not one word about how authors and publishers can have their rights protected. I guess you don't give a damn about that.