Re: Author's Rights

Vance Koven <vrkoven[_at_]world.std.com> writes:
>
> At 10:50 AM 4/9/96, Martha Luehrmann wrote:
> >
> > We need some way to control and charge for minor uses of
> > materials or portions of materials, like picking up a quote off
> > the internet, playing a soundbite, running a piece of software,
> > or showing some or all of a picture.
>
> While I agree with almost everything Martha wrote, I have to take
> issue with this snippet. It is just these minor uses that should be
> de- or unregulated, as they involve hardly any economic loss to
> creators, while imposing major inconvenience and surprise costs to
> the general public only seeking information. It is the major uses,
> such as wholesale quotation, flat out copying and misappropriation
> of secondary rights a la the Times case that should be the focus of
> copyright protection for electronic means.

I absolutely disagree. The only way to curtail economic loss to creators of content is to devise means of rewarding them for their efforts. Although well into the public domain, is the posting a the Mona Lisa's smile merely a minor use? Or is it representative of the entire work? I believe the creative content provider is worth paying a royalty to for their work.

Organizations such as NWU, and the newly formed Federation, consisting of a variety of creative folk, have formed union backed voices to demand their full due. Perhaps, finally, they will have some leverage when it comes to negotiations.

(excuse the typos--editor unavailable at this time)

Julia E. Harmatz

--
Julia E. Harmatz                    "..[T]o promote Science and
Attorney at Law                         the Useful Arts."
(206) 632-6650
JHarmatz[_at_]Msn.Com; Artlawyr[_at_]Scn.Org