Petition to reduce US copyright to 28 years

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by HarryT

"Most" jobs means exactly what it says - the majority of jobs. I neither said nor implied that authors were "special" in any way; you're the one who used that word, not me.

What does "special" mean to you, Harry?

Originally Posted by Webster

1: distinguished by some unusual quality; especially : being in some way superior <our special blend>

2: held in particular esteem <a special friend>

3a : readily distinguishable from others of the same category : unique <they set it apart as a special day of thanksgiving> b : of, relating to, or constituting a species : specific

4: being other than the usual : additional, extra

5: designed for a particular purpose or occasion

Pretty clear to me that being other than most is being other than usual, hence special.

[HarryT]

... And the government comes along 70 years after you die and takes it away from your heirs, which it doesn't do for physical stuff.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

Pretty clear to me that being other than most is being other than usual, hence special.

The sarcastic way in which you used the word clearly implied that you were claiming that authors were in a unique position in some way, which I don't believe anyone (other than you) has claimed.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The sarcastic way in which you used the word clearly implied that you were claiming that authors were in a unique position in some way, which I don't believe anyone (other than you) has claimed.

Is special, and the definition I posted, not in keeping with both what you wrote, and in a different tone, what I wrote? If you want to argue semantics, fine. But you started disliking a specific word, and the usage of that word.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

Is special, and the definition I posted, not in keeping with both what you wrote, and in a different tone, what I wrote? If you want to argue semantics, fine. But you started disliking a specific word, and the usage of that word.

I certainly believe that you misinterpreted what I wrote, but life is too short to spend any more time debating the matter.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by ApK

Irrelevant and also incorrect. You only 'own' land because we have real estate law and deeds and the artifice that says we can subdivide and own pieces of the planet surface. Ownership of farmland is not 'unlimited' as anyone who has moved, or been foreclosed on, or lost mineral rights, or been subjected to eminent domain will surely know.

Ownership of anything outside your own skin is an artificial social and legal construct and nothing more. The only difference with IP over physical property is that because it has a different nature, we created a different social and legal construct to deal with it.

The difference beween IP and real property is that real property can only be occupied by one person at a time (plz to adjust metaphor according to physics involved.)

No matter what social/legal boundaries we devise, two people can't (comfortably) occupy a chair at the same time. Six people certainly can't.

However, a poem or story or picture or even entire novel, can comfortably be shared amongst a hundred people, all of whom keep a complete and functional copy in their memories.

The memory of a chair doesn't help you sit comfortably in front of the keyboard. However, the memory of a poem works just as the original for reciting to your child to get them to sleep.

[MikeOxlittle]

Originally Posted by HarryT

He could do but (as has been discussed before ad nausiam) his royalty payments are an author's legacy to his heirs. In most jobs, you get paid while you're doing the work. An author works "for free", and gets paid once the work is complete

While you mention royalties you leave out advances?

In that case, authors are paid before they write the book, not during.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MikeOxlittle

While you mention royalties you leave out advances?

In that case, authors are paid before they write the book, not during.

But advances are an advance on royalties, so it doesn't change the overall amount of money that the author receives. The author won't get any royalties at all until the book's "earned" the amount of the advance (if there is an advance, and relatively few authors get one).

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

The difference beween IP and real property is

That's one difference. There are others. And that's my point exactly. Differences like that drove the need for "copyright" who's very name shows that it deals with the issue of making copies, which is not so much a concern for physical property.

(It may be worth pointing out here that the cabinet maker and boat maker or whatever all do indeed have their own intellectual property concerns; patents, design trademarks, etc.)

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But advances are an advance on royalties, so it doesn't change the overall amount of money that the author receives.

Well, there is work-for-hire and salaried staff jobs....

I'm losing the point of the other threads within this thread.
Anyone care to summarize?

[DarkScribe]

"We the people"?

How about "We, a very small and insignificant group of greedy people"? It would seem more apt.

I see no reason for a reduction in copyright duration. The claim that copyright hinders science or prevents any form of library is disingenuous. It appears to be a facile attempt to get something for nothing. The petition was started by someone who is not prepared to give his full name, nor provide one good reason for reducing the term of copyright.

BTW, what is a "useful art" and who defines it?

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm losing the point of the other threads within this thread.
Anyone care to summarize?

You're all wrong. But I'm right.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

You're all wrong. But I'm right.

Anyone else?

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by ApK

Irrelevant and also incorrect. You only 'own' land because we have real estate law and deeds and the artifice that says we can subdivide and own pieces of the planet surface. Ownership of farmland is not 'unlimited' as anyone who has moved, or been foreclosed on, or lost mineral rights, or been subjected to eminent domain will surely know.

Ownership of anything outside your own skin is an artificial social and legal construct and nothing more. The only difference with IP over physical property is that because it has a different nature, we created a different social and legal construct to deal with it.

And that construct is not perpetual in definition and never has been. When you read a land title it is defined to be perpetual (terms like "forever", rather than "for the term of"), I.P. is much more like a lease - I (the government) give you this monopoly (nee property, if you insist on that term) for x years.

These distinction are there for a reason, they are not merely "figures of speech, signifying nothing".

(And I have had 3 of the 4 items above happen to my nuclear family...)

[MikeOxlittle]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But advances are an advance on royalties, so it doesn't change the overall amount of money that the author receives. The author won't get any royalties at all until the book's "earned" the amount of the advance (if there is an advance, and relatively few authors get one).

I understand all that but your previous comment (and others made by other users in various threads) makes it seem, to me at least, that authors have to struggle to get by to create their works.

They chose to put themselves in that position so don't expect sympathy from the rest of us who work, in your words, most jobs.