Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
Of course, you all realise how pointless this discussion is - yes?
I'm not talking about there being a world-wide conspiracy agreement to have a minimum copyright period and the chances of changing it significantly have got to be minuscule.
No, I'm talking about science eventually solving the problem of ageing: people will live forever and life+50 will be forever+50. Companies will find ways to invest their copyright with an individual to take advantage of the law, but such people will live under virtual house arrest in order to avoid sabotage by competitors that want to utterly destroy the body and so release the copyright in 50 years time. There will be privacy arguments over whether the law can demand a person appear in person to prove that they are still living and therefore still capable of holding copyright. There will be even more legal arguments over how much of a body must exist (kept alive artificially) to keep their copyright active, with counter arguments that all humans are now kept alive artificially by the genetic treatments that prevent ageing.
( Oh man, am I cooking or what? ... Wait, has someone already done that? Have I just broken copyright?  ) |
Totally agree the discussion is pointless. Particularly since one "side" refuses to put forward any rational argument to support their view.
As for life + 50, I think corporations as a whole will, in the not too distant future, manage to extend the legal notion of Corporate Personhood to cover copyright anyway. No need for a human body at all. Just another reason the discussion is pointless.
leebase and tubemonkey will get their Utopia of endless copyright and the spiral into legal suppression of creativity will begin. I don't think they will find it to be quite the paradise they envision but I'm sure the corporations of the world will love it.