Re: copyright under stress

On Wed, 31 May 2000, John Lederer <johnl[_at_]ibm.net> wrote:
>
> I start with the assumption that the purpose of copyright is to
> give authors, as an incentive, a right to exploit their works
> for a limited time. The end goal is to enrich the public domain
> with a large body of work.
>
> Thus if we made copyright terms last a millenium, copyright would be
> totally dysfunctional. The incentive would overcome the goal.
>
> Similarly if we made copyright last for an hour, the incentive would
> be inadequate.

On the above, we are in total agreement.

> I suggest that technology (and social changes engendered by
> technology) have increased the speed at which that initial peak
> occurs.
> [...]
> The world moves faster. Copyright should be shorter.

On this, we disagree. As I replied to someone else on the same subject (and I won't repeat it all here): There is so much opportunity, precisely because of that fast-and-easy technology, for exploitation by others that it takes *longer* for the average creator to realize a reasonable return. I'm not talking about a production of the CBS evening news; I'm talking about the vast majority of individual copyright holders -- the individual artists and writers and photographers who simply seek that reasonable return. Many have given up.

--Dodi Schultz
  <schultz[_at_]compuserve.com>

rights in the face of rampant infringement. Received on Sat Jun 03 2000 - 04:22:33 GMT