Duration of copyright poll.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Barcey

I try to limit the number of people that would financially benefit from my death... so if I were an author I'd rather have it tied to the publication date rather then my death.

<blink>

Copyrights are property. You have the right to dispose of your property as you wish upon your death. You specify the disposition in your will. If you so desired, you could explicitly dedicate the rights on your work to the public domain upon your death. That wouldn't prevent people from potentially profiting on it, but it would make it available to anyone who wanted it.
______
Dennis

[Spartacus2112]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I'd consider death of the creator, with one caveat: That any financial dependents/immediate family members, if unable to take care of themselves through age (old or young) or infirmity, would continue to draw copyright until they were either of legal age to make their own living, established another source of income, or died.

That means the wife of a creator could draw upon it if the creator died before her, until she died or established other significant income, and a pre-adult would draw the income until they were a legal adult.

Anyone who was outside of the creator's circle of financial dependence would not be able to draw copyright upon the creator's death.

(I personally see this as a good arrangement for patents, as well.)

That was my exact reasoning for choosing death plus 25. This would also benefit the family if the death comes at an early age, with dependents left behind.
I also wouldn't mind seeing an option for authors at publishing. If the standard is set at death plus 25 years, for example, the author can choose that or, select a longer duration, for an additional fee.

[seajewel]

a fee to whom? the public domain isn't meant to benefit publishing companies, as far as i know, so a fee to the publisher isn't going to do it. higher taxes? it seems silly to me to say that the time at which your work passes into the public domain should be negotiable by a fee.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Elsi

I'm impressed by the authors who generously encourage others to write fan fiction set in the worlds that they have created. Several authors have been able to sell their original works after getting a start this way.

With caveats. Anne McCaffrey permits and even encourages fan fiction set in the Pern universe. But the author must explicitly copyright the work in her name and Anne's name. Anne does so out of simple self-protection.

The problem with fan fiction is the same one that afflicts many popular musicians. Periodically, you'll see news items that some musician you've never heard of has sued some big name star, claiming a track on the star's new album essentially stole the melody from a recording you've never heard and you've never heard of the musician bringing suit.

The star has likely never heard the song infringement is being claimed on, nor heard of the musician claiming infringement, but how does she prove it? In practical terms, she can't, and a lawyer friend once expounded on what he called the "Deep Pocket Theory of Jury Trials", whch was essentially "The side perceived as having the money will pay, regardless of the facts." Such cases are generally settled out of court, because the record companies don't wish to risk possibly far greater damages awarded by a jury.

Some years back, J. Michael Straczynski used to hang out on various Babylon 5 related message areas. He said again and again "Don't post story ideas. If you do, I have to leave!" The episode "Passing through Gethsemane" was written and ready for production a year before it got shot, because a fan on a Compuserve message area had posted an idea similar to what JMS had written, and he had to spend the time to track down the fan and get a release signed before he could produce the script without fear of suit.

So it is with Anne. She could be sued by a writer of Perm fanfic if her new book happens to contain things similar to what the fanfic writer did in a story Anne likely never saw. How does she prove it? Requiring copyright in her name as well as the author's neatly sidesteps the problem.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Spartacus2112

That was my exact reasoning for choosing death plus 25. This would also benefit the family if the death comes at an early age, with dependents left behind.
I also wouldn't mind seeing an option for authors at publishing. If the standard is set at death plus 25 years, for example, the author can choose that or, select a longer duration, for an additional fee.

A fee to the government under which you live.

The Berne Copyright Convention specifies that copyright exists upon the completion of the work. There is no requirement to register it with your government authority. In practice, such registration can be a good idea, because it establishes a documented legal date upon which copyright existed, and permits going for higher damages if you must sue. (In the US, at least, but I suspect for other jurisdictions as well.)

The option here is to pay a higher fee and get the copyright period increased. That would be tricky to implement, as it would require other governments to honor the increased period as well.
______
Dennis

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

<blink>

Copyrights are property. You have the right to dispose of your property as you wish upon your death. You specify the disposition in your will. If you so desired, you could explicitly dedicate the rights on your work to the public domain upon your death. That wouldn't prevent people from potentially profiting on it, but it would make it available to anyone who wanted it.
______
Dennis

Twas but a poor joke. I should have added the .

It wouldn't take much for someone to off me though. A free book or two might just tip the scale.

[Spartacus2112]

Originally Posted by seajewel

a fee to whom? the public domain isn't meant to benefit publishing companies, as far as i know, so a fee to the publisher isn't going to do it. higher taxes? it seems silly to me to say that the time at which your work passes into the public domain should be negotiable by a fee.

The fee would be paid well ahead of the time it goes into public domain, not at the last minute. Also, if possible, the copyright be applied differently among paperback and electronic.

The fee could be used by publishers, governments, or whomever to promote education and reading among children. The fee would not be put in the pockets of the publishing companies, but rather used as a way to promote and educate.

How does the process work now as far as copyright goes, as far as registering the material? What is the fee, if any, and where does that money go to and are copyrights applied equally to paperback and electronic versions of the same book?

Hopefully, Steve Jordan can shed some light on to this for me.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Under your theory, the rights to the book have just become non-existent. what happens to the income earned by it?

Why, if the copyright for 40 years from the publish date then the author dies the copyright is still good for 40 years... it is just owned by the authors heirs or assigns.

BOb

[nekokami]

I would have picked 40 years, but that not being an option, went for 30. But I'd consider life+25 with the proposed exception for dependents (minor children or elders needing care). I actually think life+anything is inappropriate without this kind of requirement.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Spartacus2112

How does the process work now as far as copyright goes, as far as registering the material? What is the fee, if any, and where does that money go to and are copyrights applied equally to paperback and electronic versions of the same book?

That will vary depending upon where you are.

In the US, copyrights are registered through the US Copyright Office, which is an arm of the Library of Congress.

Go here for more info: http://www.copyright.gov/
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Why, if the copyright for 40 years from the publish date then the author dies the copyright is still good for 40 years... it is just owned by the authors heirs or assigns.

Fine, if that's the case, but RLauzon's post appeared to assume rights evaporated upon the author's death.
______
Dennis

[Trenien]

Originally Posted by Spartacus2112

How does the process work now as far as copyright goes, as far as registering the material? What is the fee, if any, and where does that money go to and are copyrights applied equally to paperback and electronic versions of the same book?

Hopefully, Steve Jordan can shed some light on to this for me.

As far as I know, nowhere in the world do you need to register your creation to benefit from the copyright.

You're confusing the process with that of patents.


As for the available options in the poll, I didn't add 40 years because I wanted to avoid increasing even more the number of possible answers.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Trenien

As far as I know, nowhere in the world do you need to register your creation to benefit from the copyright.

Uniquely, copyright registration used to be required in the US, before it became a signatory to the Berne Convention. It no longer is required, although can still be done.

[GeoffC]

I'd say 40 years from publication, no extension, even if author still alive at that time. 40 years ought to be enough for the benefit to accrue.
After all a person in a 'normal' job gets around 40 years (in UK at least) to earn enough, save enough, provide for dependents etc.

Interesting article here on copyright...punishments

G.

[Greg Anos]

Once more into the breach....

I.P. is not real property. It is not perpetual, nor is it property is the purest sense. It never has been. It is a government granted, wasting, monopoly. All the way back to the Stature of Anne (1714), it has been defines as a wasting monopoly. It has been consider in the public good for the monopoly to waste, as generically monopolies are bad things. It was granted to encourage more production of I.P. (Using a bad thing to encourage more of a good thing.) It is the same for (almost) any I.P. (Trademarks die when they are no longer used after a period of time.) It is not property being seized, it never existed as property proper. (it's definition is separate from property in the US constitution.)