Z-Library is back, alas

[salamanderjuice]

I can see some argument for it but not the currently ridiculous standard of 70 years after death. Imagine if a spouse is financially supporting their loved one while they write the next great American novel or whatever only for the loved one to die shortly after publication. In that unlikely scenario or similar there should be a few years protection after death I think. But making sure that book can keep the great-grandkids provided for is just bizarre.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by salamanderjuice

I can see some argument for it but not the currently ridiculous standard of 70 years after death. Imagine if a spouse is financially supporting their loved one while they write the next great American novel or whatever only for the loved one to die shortly after publication. In that unlikely scenario or similar there should be a few years protection after death I think. But making sure that book can keep the great-grandkids provided for is just bizarre.

Well, yeah, ok. Life + 20 should cover all such cases. But certainly no longer.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Copyright should end with the author's death. Why should the author's heirs benefit? They can earn their own wages, just like anyone else's heirs.

Not that it would necessarily lessen piracy, of course.

So if an author has a book published a week ago and then dies, it's OK for this newly published book to become PD? I would say no.

I would go with life+10.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

So if an author has a book published a week ago and then dies, it's OK for this newly published book to become PD? I would say no.

I would go with life+10.

Yes, yes. But no life+50 or more. That's ridiculous.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by issybird

This is what I mean. Once costs are covered, it’s demand that sets price. Why should rights holders have to accept a lower price than they can get/that maximizes their profits?

I hope this kind of thinking never gets applied to medical stuff. It already has in some instances. I received a one time injection of a drug that was developed in the 1940's. Isuprel specifically. Used to be about $5 a dose, IIRC. My dose? $19,500!!! That was the right's holder "maximizing their profits". Couldn't do anything about it. Insurance paid it.
Another right's holder did the same thing with Epi pens used by people with severe allergies.

I support Capitalism, but one has to admit, there are a few glitches in it when "maximizing their profits" goes unchecked, no questioning allowed.

[jhowell]

My view on copyright is a little different. It should be a temporary protection in exchange for the work eventually becoming publicly available.

I think that anyone wanting copyright protection should need to register for it for free. The protection would last only ten years unless renewed for a fee of about $100. With each ten year renewal the fee would increase by a factor of ten. If not renewed before the end of a ten year cycle it would automatically expire.

[John F]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

So if an author has a book published a week ago and then dies, it's OK for this newly published book to become PD? I would say no.

I would go with life+10.

I would say life +any contractual agreements (the publishers should be able to have the contract honored), with a limit on the length of any contracts extending past death.

And I'm not sure how corporations/trusts/... owning copyright would work, some sort of limit?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by jhowell

My view on copyright is a little different. It should be a temporary protection in exchange for the work eventually becoming publicly available.

Your implementation details may be subject to debate but the above is the exact stated reason for copyright and other IP protections existing in the US Constitution:
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

[haertig]

One one hand, long default copyrights seem silly. Why is there an automatic protection? I don't get that if I come up with a new design concept. I have to patent that, or I get no protection if someone else copies it.

On the other hand, why should the public have any right to read someone else's work that the author - or their family if they formally inherited the work - wants to keep private?

I believe that an author should have to "claim copyright". Officially register it in some manner. Like a patent. And also officially register it as a directed inheritance if they want the copyright to pass down to their family. Just like what wills and trusts are used for today. If the author fails to stake their claim as suggested, well, that was a bad decision on their part. But if they DID state their claim, it's their work and they should be able to keep others from it, basically forever, if they put it into a trust or other legal vehicle to keep it private.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by haertig

On the other hand, why should the public have any right to read someone else's work that the author - or their family if they formally inherited the work - wants to keep private?

If they want it private, they should not publish it. Keep it in the drawer. Once you've published it, it's no longer private.

And I certainly don't believe that any published works should be inherited.

[maddz]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

If they want it private, they should not publish it. Keep it in the drawer. Once you've published it, it's no longer private.

And I certainly don't believe that any published works should be inherited.

Then you get the situation where an author’s papers have been acquired by a university or similar and in the course of sorting the papers private letters or diaries are found that throw an unwelcome light on the author? The author never published them, should the university?

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by maddz

Then you get the situation where an author’s papers have been acquired by a university or similar and in the course of sorting the papers private letters or diaries are found that throw an unwelcome light on the author? The author never published them, should the university?

I'd say not, unless the author has been dead for a very long time. But this is kind of a grey situation. Where should the line be drawn?

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by issybird

I think piracy mostly exists because people can and because a lot of people aren’t willing to pay anything at all if they don’t have to.

While that is undoubtedly true for some small segment of society, I think using that as an easy pass for all digital piracy of ebooks is inaccurate/lazy. Look at the example of digital music. There is still some piracy. But it is nowhere near the level it was at in the days of Napster.

iTunes and then Amazon's DRM-free MP3s and then streaming services have all made it easier to get music legitimately than it is to pirate it.

Publishers could learn a lesson there. But they don't. I would bet that it's because piracy isn't really a big enough problem for them to worry about changing the ways they do business.

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

iTunes and then Amazon's DRM-free MP3s and then streaming services have all made it easier to get music legitimately than it is to pirate it.

Gabe Newell (president of Valve Software) once said "The easiest way to stop piracy is not by putting anti-piracy technology to work. It's by giving those people a service that's better than what they're receiving from the pirates."

Source: https://www.eurogamer.net/newell-sto...perior-service

[isarl]

Originally Posted by ownedbycats

Gabe Newell (president of Valve Software) once said "The easiest way to stop piracy is not by putting anti-piracy technology to work. It's by giving those people a service that's better than what they're receiving from the pirates."

Source: https://www.eurogamer.net/newell-sto...perior-service

I was thinking of the same thing. More Gabe Newell on the topic:

“We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem. If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate’s service is more valuable.”