Quote:
Originally Posted by sun surfer
I haven't thought on it much until just now, but my first instinct for books would be something like: 50 years or life+20, non-renewable and whichever comes later. This would protect the author's actual family in case the author dies young (and not some money-grubbing descendants of the author), and the author herself in case the work doesn't become successful until years later, while being short enough to give the world the work of art in a timely manner and not being so long and drawn out just for the sake of making a few people richer who don't necessarily deserve it.
|
What you're suggesting is having a relatively long certain term (50 years) compared to the uncertain term (life + 20 years), on the grounds that this ensures that works receive a more equal length of protection.
Which is precisely the argument made in the mid-19th century in the UK parliament by
Macauley. Only he set the limit to 42 years or the lifetime of the author, whichever is longer.
The main problem with any significant copyright reform is the Berne Convention, which specifies a minimum term of life+50.