Quote:
Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks
That is why I support patents and copyright. It is not a perfect answer, but it lends credibility to the idea that the art is WORTH something and that price should be set and controlled by the rights' holder. The copyright period should, at the very least, cover the life of the author and IMO, probably the first generation (Because if a writer dies with young children, the writer probably hoped that the income from writing was going to allow those children to have food and shelter.)
|
One of my issues with copyright is that the excessive durations aren't really justified. One perspective:
- Most works only have value for a limited time after their creation. So there is very little value to having copyrights exceeding 28 years.
- Works of lasting value are likely to increase their value to society in the public domain.
A second perspective is that the notion of doing something once and living off the proceeds for the rest of your life is deeply offensive to people who actually have to work for a living. Farmers have to continue growing food to earn a living. Factories have to continue producing goods in order to generate revenues. Heck, even other industries that are driven by other forms of intellectual property (like patents) have to continue innovating because they are only protected for 20 years.
Then how do they survive: they continue producing. If they want to stop producing, then they have to put money aside. In other words, they should do what everyone else does. They should not feel entitled to any more.