Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

How long should copyrights last?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How long should copyrights last?

    I find it odd that copyrights last 70 years after an author's death or 95 years for "work for hire" copyrights. That seems about 35 to 50 years longer than it needs to be. I don't see why publishing companies or the descendants of authors need to make money off of works that were published many decades ago. I think it would be better for those people, if they want to continue making money, to work on creating new works. Plus, it seems good for society if works can enter the public domain after a reasonable amount of time. I also don't see why copyrights should renew automatically. It seems like it should only be renewed if the copyright owner has a strong interest in doing so. So my suggestion is copyright for 25 years, which can be renewed so it lasts up to 20 years after the author's death or 60 years after publication for work for hire.
    If you want to read more, here are some links I found:
    http://sundial.csun.edu/2006/11/whyc...awslastsolong/
    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-copyrights-last-so-long
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyri..._United_States

    Also, just to be clear, I'm not advocating that people violate current copyright laws; I'm proposing that the laws change.
    Find my speling strange? I'm trying this out: Simplified Speling. Feel free to join me.

    "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do."-Jeremy Bentham

    "We question all our beliefs, except for the ones that we really believe in, and those we never think to question."-Orson Scott Card

  • #2
    It seems to me that very few works garner significant royalties after a decade or two. Those that endure ought to be protected, IMO. That intellectual property lapses to the public domain at all differentiates it from other property. I think most people want shorter time frames for copyright because they like to get stuff for free.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • #3
      This has been an argument for generations. Personally, I don't object to the heirs profiting from their works. It's the so called fair use concept that I consider insane. In film, for example, permission must be got to show statues etc and possibly royalties be paid if it's even for a few seconds. This kind of practice is one big reason films get so costly to make. Fair use in written works have the same challenge.
      Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

      Comment


      • #4
        Copyright laws seem reasonable enough to me. What I don't like is when a company like Disney does inconsequential reissues like "collector's editions" in order to artificially extend the original copyright.

        What really needs to be overhauled is not copyright law but patent law.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          It seems to me that very few works garner significant royalties after a decade or two. Those that endure ought to be protected, IMO. That intellectual property lapses to the public domain at all differentiates it from other property. I think most people want shorter time frames for copyright because they like to get stuff for free.
          So do you think copyrights should be renewed indefinitely so long as something is making a given amount of money or being sold a give number of times in a certain period? Or just renewed for some very long time? Or something else?

          Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
          This has been an argument for generations. Personally, I don't object to the heirs profiting from their works. It's the so called fair use concept that I consider insane. In film, for example, permission must be got to show statues etc and possibly royalties be paid if it's even for a few seconds. This kind of practice is one big reason films get so costly to make. Fair use in written works have the same challenge.
          I agree about the fair use part. As for the heirs profiting from the original writers' works argument, I suppose it all boils down to how much one supports inheritance in general. I'm not a big fan of large inheritances because I want individuals to be motivated to find their own employment, but I can also understand why someone would want to help their descendants out.

          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          What really needs to be overhauled is not copyright law but patent law.
          What problems do you have with patent law?
          Last edited by stfoskey15; 04-15-2016, 10:05 PM.
          Find my speling strange? I'm trying this out: Simplified Speling. Feel free to join me.

          "Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do."-Jeremy Bentham

          "We question all our beliefs, except for the ones that we really believe in, and those we never think to question."-Orson Scott Card

          Comment


          • #6
            I agree with long copyright laws. If somebody publishes something, that is his/her property. They have a right to make money off of their product. Are you too cheap to want to buy it from them?

            As far as patent law, and that can include medicine, I question the right to patent the laws of physics. Maybe enough for pharmaceuticals to make a profit from the years and expense they put into researching a medicine.

            Where I take issue is the right of Christian musicians and writers to copyright something which they, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, wrote in praise to the Lord.

            That goes for the New American Standard Bible (which happens to be my favorite translation). They allow you to quote so many hundred verses, as long as you give them credit. But no more, without special permission. Should we need to get permission to quote an English translation of something which God, by the Holy Spirit, inspired a prophet of God to put into writing?
            When I Survey....

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by stfoskey15 View Post
              What problems do you have with patent law?
              I don't want to drag this thread off topic, so I will simply refer you to this article:

              http://www.cbsnews.com/news/patent-t...ng-us-economy/
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by stfoskey15 View Post
                So do you think copyrights should be renewed indefinitely so long as something is making a given amount of money or being sold a give number of times in a certain period? Or just renewed for some very long time? Or something else?
                The law we have now is fine.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Faber View Post
                  I agree with long copyright laws. If somebody publishes something, that is his/her property. They have a right to make money off of their product. Are you too cheap to want to buy it from them?

                  As far as patent law, and that can include medicine, I question the right to patent the laws of physics. Maybe enough for pharmaceuticals to make a profit from the years and expense they put into researching a medicine.

                  Where I take issue is the right of Christian musicians and writers to copyright something which they, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, wrote in praise to the Lord.

                  That goes for the New American Standard Bible (which happens to be my favorite translation). They allow you to quote so many hundred verses, as long as you give them credit. But no more, without special permission. Should we need to get permission to quote an English translation of something which God, by the Holy Spirit, inspired a prophet of God to put into writing?
                  Faber, copyright lasts for the duration of the authors lives and an additional amount of time. No change to copyright laws will prevent, say, JK Rowling from being paid for Harry Potter.

                  The problem that is being run into is the one I describe below.

                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  The law we have now is fine.
                  Just wait, it'll be extended again.

                  Was the law we still had in the 90's now fine? Then it was the life of the author plus 50 years, or 75 for work for hire.

                  Public Domain is good for storytelling because those stories then evolve into new, interesting stories. We see that in comics like Fables, TV show's like "Once Upon a Time" and through the continual reinvention of things like Zombies and Vampires. What undergirds that entertainment are all things that, once upon a time, would have been copyright infringement, but those tales became public domain either through age or accident and now we have amazing stories coming out that mix the tales of old with the interesting things of our modern world. Fables, especially, is damn skippy.

                  Can you imagine a world in which nobody published time travel stories because the corporation that bought the estate of Jules Verne was able to sue everyone writing a story featuring a time machine?

                  Mountain Man is not telling the full story though. Disney lobbies congress extensively to get copyright extended to protect their billion dollar business. Never in the history of creative works have people been so restricted from remixing and reinventing the ideas of the past. The US Constitution actually says that such things need to be limited

                  Originally posted by The US Constitution, Article 1! Section 8
                  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.
                  This isn't about getting stuff for free. The founding fathers knew that creating new things often meant building on the backs of giants. We are running into some problems, creatively, because nothing after Mickey Mouse aside from legal screwups like King Kong are in the public domain. This is about how the creative process works, and has worked, for ages
                  Last edited by Jaecp; 04-18-2016, 05:09 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    hmm and since copyright exists automatically without having to file a copyright form, that means everything I have ever posted is copyrighted. So every time anyone has quoted my posts, they owe me a royalty for republishing my work. Pay up suckers!!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                      hmm and since copyright exists automatically without having to file a copyright form, that means everything I have ever posted is copyrighted. So every time anyone has quoted my posts, they owe me a royalty for republishing my work. Pay up suckers!!
                      I'm pretty sure forum posts are considered public domain. I know that there are issues with writers posting stories on websites because the publishers consider those to be 'first work'. The writing group I was a part of took special care to password protect specific areas for writers to get feedback without worrying about messing up their first work.
                      I'm not here anymore.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        The law we have now is fine.
                        The duration just needs to be shortened a lot.
                        I'm not here anymore.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                          copywrited text not quoted.
                          You quoted me!!! Pay up!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            There are some ridiculous rules concerning copyrights and video games from what I understand. Despite the fact that I own copies of various NES, SNES, and Genesis cartridges, I can't download the ROM's to play them on an emulator. The only way it's truly legal, is if I rip the file from the cartridge itself. IIRC the device needed to do that is itself illegal in some places.

                            Then there are games that have been completely abandoned, lost their publishers, or their owners simply will not release them. That last category is the most frustrating IMO. There are a lot of really old games that only have a few cartridges left, and are worth a lot. They are "sleeper hits", and the companies could make a fortune selling legitimate copies.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
                              This has been an argument for generations. Personally, I don't object to the heirs profiting from their works. It's the so called fair use concept that I consider insane. In film, for example, permission must be got to show statues etc and possibly royalties be paid if it's even for a few seconds. This kind of practice is one big reason films get so costly to make. Fair use in written works have the same challenge.
                              Fair use is that in certain circumstances, you can infringe on copyright without having to be accountable whatsoever to the copyright owner. So if I write a book review, I can use some quotes from the book to help make my point. I don't see how it relates at all to things like how showing a statue in a movie might cost money. Are you thinking about something else?

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              7 responses
                              56 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              42 responses
                              244 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              25 responses
                              106 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              194 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              73 responses
                              322 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X