Active Users:1120 Time:22/11/2024 01:20:31 PM
I don't get it. Palatine Send a noteboard - 04/01/2012 05:51:19 PM
The good folks at the Center for the Study of the Public Domain at Duke University put together a depressing list each year of what would have gone into the public domain under copyright law if the law prior to 1978 remained in effect. You can check out this year's unfortunate list of works seized from the public in a retroactive one-sided renegotiation of the deal the copyright holders had with the public. These works should be in the public domain, and they're not... and the public got nothing in exchange for having these works taken away from us. Pulling from their writeup, here are just a few of the works that I thought you might find interesting:


Nothing can be taken from us that we never had to begin with.

The thing is, with the list of works from 1955 above, when they were all created, the maximum term of copyright of 56 years was a perfectly acceptable trade-off for those creators. They got their monopoly, and they created their works. What I can't understand is what the logic is in extending those rights retroactively. Clearly the incentive to create was fine as it was. Why should it change after the work was created?


Why should they ever give up their monopoly?

I fail to see any injustices being done or rights violated. If I'm wrong, please explain it to me, rather than just stating that it is so.
*MySmiley*

I play air tambourine. Competitively.
Reply to message
Why Johnny Can't Read Any New Public Domain Books In The US: Because Nothing New Entered The P.D. - 03/01/2012 11:33:34 PM 1792 Views
I find it difficult to see this as stealing rights from the public. - 04/01/2012 11:15:35 AM 925 Views
Are you arguing for illegal use of legally protected works? - 04/01/2012 09:34:18 PM 855 Views
No. I'm saying that keeping works in copyright doesn't stop them from being read, watched, etc. - 04/01/2012 10:24:50 PM 863 Views
That's not the point, though. - 05/01/2012 01:05:17 PM 907 Views
???? - 05/01/2012 03:22:58 PM 882 Views
Re: ???? - 05/01/2012 04:04:21 PM 922 Views
not to mention public libraries *NM* - 05/01/2012 03:21:04 PM 495 Views
Blame Disney. *NM* - 04/01/2012 05:48:00 PM 630 Views
I don't get it. - 04/01/2012 05:51:19 PM 1143 Views
You know those Jane Austen parodies? Only because Jane Austen is in the public domain. - 04/01/2012 09:32:20 PM 950 Views
Answering you specifically - 05/01/2012 04:57:33 PM 883 Views
But that doesn't make sense. - 05/01/2012 07:18:08 PM 1041 Views
Here's the gist of it. - 06/01/2012 04:18:29 PM 881 Views
Patents and copyrights aren't meant to last forever (shouldn't, anyway) - 04/01/2012 10:33:30 PM 911 Views
I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though. - 05/01/2012 05:01:05 PM 827 Views
Copyrights stifle creativity. - 05/01/2012 07:48:08 PM 915 Views
Re: Copyrights stifle creativity. - 06/01/2012 04:39:24 PM 1312 Views
Re: I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though. - 06/01/2012 12:47:50 AM 845 Views
Why. - 06/01/2012 05:05:20 PM 1458 Views
That is a very confusing article. - 04/01/2012 10:19:22 PM 978 Views
Works published between 1923 and 1978 are different - 04/01/2012 10:25:16 PM 902 Views
Do you think it is right that Disney can protect its movies? - 05/01/2012 05:29:08 PM 855 Views
Ok, what has movies Disney done lately that were on par with its classics? *NM* - 05/01/2012 07:44:20 PM 388 Views
And speaking of Disney's classics... - 05/01/2012 10:06:16 PM 1009 Views
Until Disney discovered and copyrighted them, they obviouslty didn't exist. *NM* - 06/01/2012 12:58:55 AM 423 Views
Except of course they haven't copyrighted them... - 06/01/2012 01:53:01 AM 835 Views
nice theory but you can make a Little Mermaid movie if you want - 06/01/2012 02:48:47 PM 890 Views
Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug* - 05/01/2012 07:57:38 PM 1003 Views
Do you really want corporations to be immortal? - 06/01/2012 12:50:11 AM 907 Views
In a sense, aren't they already? - 06/01/2012 02:42:53 AM 997 Views
Re: Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug* - 06/01/2012 01:18:04 AM 904 Views
It's a thorny issue and I largely agree with you - 06/01/2012 02:50:24 AM 930 Views
Huh... apparently, Mickey Mouse is already Public Domain anyway - 06/01/2012 07:30:36 AM 1087 Views
Can you back that up? - 06/01/2012 04:17:35 AM 1029 Views
Re: Can you back that up? - 06/01/2012 06:02:01 PM 820 Views
Re: the piracy issues - 06/01/2012 06:30:46 AM 1018 Views
Book piracy - 06/01/2012 05:21:40 PM 1122 Views
corporations have always had rights - 06/01/2012 04:08:12 PM 871 Views

Reply to Message