Quote:
Originally Posted by speakingtohe
1. A book must be made available to maintain a copyright. If it is not for sale for a period of (for example) 10 years te copyright expires.
|
Matthew Barney is an artist who has made several films, and wants strict control over when and where they are shown. They are not available on DVD, Barney says they will never be released on DVD, and apparently he has no interest in his films being treated like a commodity. Why should he be forced to sell his work if he doesn't want to?
Christo and Jeanne-Claude are artists who intentionally make temporary artworks, designs and sculptures; the whole idea is to make works that are not permanent. Should they be forced to make their structures permanent in order to maintain protection of the work?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by speakintohe
2. A book must within a certain time be (again perhaps 10 years) made avaliable to libraries or the copyright expires.
|
If I write a book that suggests that every library should be closed, why should I be forced to make the book available to libraries?
Libraries are a common good. Much like public parks, someone has to pay for those goods, and it ought to be the library's patrons. Not the authors.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by speakingtohe
I think authors heirs have a right to benefit as do people who have invested money in the work. But if they show no effort to do so then the copyright is benefitting no-one.
|
There is not, and should not be, any requirement for a content creator's work to "benefit anyone." If I want to write a book that someone believes is harmful, they are entitled to their opinion -- and I'm entitled to write and distribute the book anyway.