View Single Post
Old 11-03-2014, 12:09 PM   #32
HarryT
eBook Enthusiast
HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
HarryT's Avatar
 
Posts: 85,557
Karma: 93980341
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike L View Post
I agree that they rights owners will only get the fee paid for the actual use, but that wasn't what I was asking. I was asking who pays the fee - the person using the work, or (in effect) the taxpayer?

I also agree that only a very small number of rights owners are going to come forward. And, even then, I suspect the amount they get paid will be fairly trivial. But I don't see how that leads to your conclusion that there "is not going to be a net cost to the taxpayer".

But I don't want to make a big issue of this point. I only raised it out of curiosity.

Mike
There is a precedent for a fairly similar situation, which was when the UK extended copyright term from "Life+50" to "Life+70" years, and so 20 years'-worth of work that had been in the public domain once again became protected by copyright. What happened then is that everyone who was making use of material that re-entered copyright was permitted to carry on using it, but had to pay a (small) fee to the copyright holder.
HarryT is offline   Reply With Quote