Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
Laws change. And this is another example of trivia being put forth as real pertinent argument. The vast majority of what is pirated has nothing to do with the difference between the dates of public domain.
|
But you weren't going by the legal definition of "stealing;" you were using some moral/ethical claim that a different kind of activity is "stealing." You were even ignoring the areas where that activity is legal, depending on country and sometimes individual circumstances.
If the law isn't your basis for what is "stealing," what is? A lot of us think that the terms a document was published under should be its terms forever--that retroactively changing the length of copyright protection is an ex post facto law and shouldn't be allowed, and doesn't need to be honored.
It's like issuing you a driver's license good for 10 years, and then saying, "no, it's only good for the next year and a half; then you'll have to renew it." We gave those authors the right to exploit their works for 56 years, as agreed; they should release them, according to the terms of publication.
I suspect that it's not going to matter soon; I don't think Disney will succeed in extending the law again. And in the next two decades, a *frightening* amount of material is going to hit the US public domain. I expect bizarre trademark lawsuits about Mickey Mouse and Superman, as people make their own movies & novels and start selling them.