Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
I'd consider death of the creator, with one caveat: That any financial dependents/immediate family members, if unable to take care of themselves through age (old or young) or infirmity, would continue to draw copyright until they were either of legal age to make their own living, established another source of income, or died.
That means the wife of a creator could draw upon it if the creator died before her, until she died or established other significant income, and a pre-adult would draw the income until they were a legal adult.
Anyone who was outside of the creator's circle of financial dependence would not be able to draw copyright upon the creator's death.
(I personally see this as a good arrangement for patents, as well.)
|
What about a taxi driver's family?
And a miner's one?
And a peasant's wife? Should she starve when he's dead?
And the President's?
And the Lawyer's?
That's nonsense.
Or it has sense only if every other worker's family is taken care of.
Or is a writer's family worth more for the society than the carpenter's one?
What you propose is: we have an aristocracy who has the right to have money just because they married (or were generated from) the right one, and the rest of the people who won't.
I don't like it at all.