Quote:
Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks
My library is fairly small so a lot of what I read is interlibrary loan--and that costs me 2.50 per book.
As for most of this, I'll just have to respectfully disagree. I think it's okay to protect the copyright holder for at least a lifetime if not longer. Saying it isn't public domain does not mean the public doesn't have access (as someone above said that I gained from previous works and built upon that--well those works would still be available for me to purchase. Just because they aren't public domain doesn't mean I don't have access to them.) I value books and I value the work that went into them. I don't mind paying something for them. I pay taxes to the library and they buy books. That helps support authors, publishers and innovators.
As for my favorites, and whether older stuff would be my favorites--I have access to even older works now whether they are public domain or not. There's plenty of older stuff out there, some of if PD and some not. And in my case making it public domain would not encourage me to seek it out. It's a recommendation that causes me to seek out a work and the act of paying for it would not keep me from accessing it, assuming it's a fairly accessible fee. If it is not, I will find something else to read and wish luck and happiness on those who can afford the price--just like I might want to drive an Aston Martin or a Lexus, but won't be doing that. I hold no ill will that it's not in my budget, nor do I think that the technology or the car is owed to me as a "public" domain right.
It's fine with me if people want to read only pubic domain works, but it's also fine with me if other authors/writers/publishers attempt to sell that work.
|
I do believe that copyright should last for the lifetime of a creator (or some comparative span for corporations), to give someone a long time to create more works. I wouldn't mind seeing a small extension after death, so that the author's wishes could be respected in the time after his death the estate can be wrapped up, and if there are still any profits coming in, it could help with the expenses of the author's passing.
As far as your comment about not seeking things out if made public domain, well, that's just you. Also, one of the most common things I've heard of, is people who read stories when they were younger, but now that they're older the books are out of print, the author is long since dead with no clear owner of the copyright, and they're wanting to read those books again. That's a common scenario where people are trying to seek older stories and are hampered by how the copyright system currently is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
I disagree. I don't see eternal copyright as a restriction upon creativity. For example; even if Dracula was still under copyright, there'd still be plenty of room for innovation in the genre of vampires since Dracula was based upon folklore passed down for centuries. Anyone would be free to create their own stories based upon this folklore without infringing upon Dracula's copyright.
|
The problem is, the way copyright is being used, it would block similar works too. If it were copyrighted still, you'd have issues writing stories about brainwashed lackies, Royalty with a monsterous nature, etc.
Plus in the case of Dracula, you can very apparently see the details from the folklore it was based on. If any of that had been copyrighted, Dracula couldn't have remained as is.