Re: The Basic Question: Why??

  The question of duration is a fascinating one. I think we understand the reasons for the shortness of the patent period. Since it grants a monopoly for the exploitation of the invention (rather than a limited monopoly, like copyright) it is logical that the term is shorter.

  I have wondered, however, how we got to such a long duration for copyright protection. At life plus for 50 (or 70 in the future), the duration goes well beyond what most authors probably need as an incentive to create. It secures compensation from a work for probably a hundred or more years, and will most likely grant royalties at least two generations away from the original creator (theoretically, a generation is often fixed at 33 years). In the meantime, at least in a paper based society, the paper on which the original work was fixed, has probably deteriorated to the point where the original is unusable.

  We are already at life plus 50. We may soon go to life plus 70. Why?

  If these are the directions it is heading, shouldn't there be some mechanism created for preservation (the current preservation section is not consistent with the needs of modern preservation activities)? Isn't there some level of interest on the part of the public for access to historic works that would allow most works to go into the public domain before 100 - 150 years have passed?

  I find it significant that the studies prepared as a part of the effort leading up to the 1976 act, found that the vast majority of copyright owners did not renew their copyright after 28 years. Why? Probably because the market value in *most* works is non-existent after even a few years. What seems to be happening is that because a few great works do retain their value for an extended period, nothing else is being allowed to go into the public domain, even though it would be socially useful to allow it to do so.

  There must be some way to get around this dilemma -- to allow some works to be used freely after some period of time, while still allowing protection for a longer period for those works that still hold significant value. The old renewal system created just such a screening mechanism. I wonder if there is anything we can do in the new environment.

Bob

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  Robert L. Oakley (Bob)          PHONE:        (202) 662-9160
  Georgetown Univ. Law Library    FAX:          (202) 662-9202  
  111 G Street, N.W.              INTERNET:     ROAKLEY[_at_]GUVAX.GEORGETOWN.EDU
  Washington, D.C. 20001                        OAKLEY[_at_]LAW.GEORGETOWN.EDU
                                  PACKET RADIO: WK3C @ N3BBF.MD.USA
                                   

I make no claim of copyright in this message and hereby place it in the public domain. Feel free to reproduce, retransmit, or copy the message, but please retain the signature line or give appropriate credit for any such use.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
   Received on Thu Mar 03 1994 - 17:58:20 GMT