Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_mchale
I don't think anyone has said that copyright should automatically end at death, but certainly it has been implied by these people who are asking why the estate of an author should benefit.
|
I could be wrong, but I think those people are talking in terms of a "life + X" copyright duration, which I also disagree with. I don't think copyright should have a built in inheritance, but if it's a fixed length it shouldn't end with the authors death either. The heirs shouldn't have an automatic benefit, but they can claim whatever is left if the author dies before the copyright expires.
Quote:
|
My one objection to a single fixed length is simple.
|
I agree with you there. I think that comes down to what is a reasonable fixed length. IMO, it should be the amount of time that it takes for the average work to be profitable. Obviously that will be hard to define and is different for various types of content, so compromises need to be reached. However, 50 years is rediculous, IMO. I would be OK with 20. The original length of copyright in the US was 14 years with a single renewal option. That, IMO, was probably the most reasonable copyright term that we've ever had. All the extensions since then have been based on corporate greed. I wouldn't be upset if they put it back to 14 + 14.