Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil_liS
The argument for extending copyright beyond the life of the author was for the benefit of the family of the author. If it no longer serves that purpose, why is the extension necessary?
|
As a thought experiment, contemplating copyright being for the life of the creator/author and passing to the public domain immediately upon death creates some interesting scenarios.
If corporations could not hold a copyright, only a license, it would be in the interst of a licensee to keep the author/creator alive. This could include contractual obligations to refrain from hazardous activities and treat medical conditions. It could also create an incentive for the licensee to provide health benefits. It could create an incentive to keep an author on life support.
Converesely, rival publishers or in the case of unlicensed works, create an incentive to shorten the life of an author/creator so that the work would pass to the public domain.
Although all these incentives have some validity now, the extension beyond death are far enough in the future to not be meaningful to a publisher.