I agree that copyright length is far too long. If we could reduce it to (50 years or life of author, whichever is longer) I'd be happy, and that certainly wouldn't affect the production of literaru and other works.
Even limiting copyright to a fixed term of (say) 25 years would be OK by me, and probably wouldn't affect the creation of literary and other copyright works.
But I feel copyright length is a separate issue to unauthorised copying of copyright material.
Paul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
Let me rephrase my quibble. There is a small class of people who are able to use copyright to their advantage. They are busy telling the rest of us (who can't) that the entire creative world will come to an end if they don't get to keep all their special privileges (and their heirs and assigns). I'm sorry, I don't buy it. In some sections of I.P. yes, others no. If you cut it back to what patent has, I doubt if you'd lose much at all. Remember, copyright is a balancing act between the needs of the public for free access to creative products and the encouragement of new I.P. creation. It's not a social welfare program for a creative class, unto the n'th generation...
|