Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitch
The "ever extending" copyright term? Y'know...I truly believe that that's just more justification and rationalization. Every argument I see about piracy always leads with the ubiquitous "but what about OOP books that I'm dying to read!," and goes on from there, usually devolving into the "well, the authors/publishers are greedy, because they don't NEED copyright protections for X years" argument. The latter, of course, is just someone who feels perfectly justified in disposing of someone else's property, or deciding what's "right" about how long that person is entitled to their own, created property.
I don't think that term of copyright has Sweet FA to do with piracy. It's just a convenient bit of prestidigitation.
Hitch
|
Sorry Hitch, I totally disagree. Copyright is not property, no matter how much people call it Intellectual Property. It is a time-limited monopoly.
(For my organized view - see my monograph here on Mobileread, from 2009 -
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=38392 )
If you had a mortgage on your house for 30 years, and at year 25 the mortgage company decided unilaterally to extend it for another 30 years, because they likes the extra money, would you consider that fair and reasonable? It's the same with extending copyright.
Are you aware that everything created in the US before 1960 (except music performance) should have reverted to the public domain, if it were not for copyright extensions?