Re: actuaries and copyright extension

From: Roger Wilcox Cloud <cloud[_at_]informix.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 11:24:03 -0700

I really like that "intergenerational resource" concept. After all, if we value the creation of copyright-worthy material (as obviously we do), then this "stock in trade" should be recognized as that with which the creator (small c) can endow his family. Providers of other skills or services have the ability to pass along "hard" goods, contract rights, etc., and without any necessary time limit; why shouldn't copyright creators be given a not insubstantial such right (with due regard to the eventual societal value to be recognized after the copyright's termination)?

---

Roger Wilcox Cloud			cloud[_at_]informix.com
Sr. Counsel, Intellectual Property	phone:	415-926-6357
Informix Software, Inc.			fax:	415-926-1133

4100 Bohannon Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025

On 4/25/96, Jon Binks <jbinks[_at_]ksgadmit.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> Doesn't an extended term better respect those creators who might
> have works that time could protect. I'm thinking of works that are
> created not with the intent of immediate recognition but where
> unauthorized reproduction would be premature or could harm the
> creator or the creator's family. Or suppose Disney and his family
> came to repudiate "his little rodent friend." And wouldn't an
> extended term allow the family, friends, heirs, to more fully
> participate in the management of works that might require special
> attention. An extended term recognizes that one can create with
> greater (if not complete) control over the "life" of those work--i.e.
> down the road really matters. I can think of other legal methods to
> address these concerns but I'm grappling with the idea of copyright
> as protecting the individual and their personality and not as
> motivated exclusively by economic considerations. Copyright, too,
> as an intergenerational resource, perhaps...
>
> Jon Binks
>
>
> ======================================================================
> Jon Binks
> KSG Copyright Services
> 617-495-5078
> 617-496-4388
> jbinks[_at_]ksgadmit.harvard.edu
> ======================================================================
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Apr 96, Jayne Sebby <jsebby[_at_]unlinfo.unl.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > The point is that if Walt Disney had been told in 1922 that his
>> > monopoly on his creation would expire in 2017 instead of 1997, and
>> > then done the math, he would not have discovered an appreciablly
>> > increased economic motivation to create his little rodent friend.
>> >
>> > Paul J. Heald
>> > University of Georgia School of Law
>>
>> Very few creative people do things just for the financial reward or
>> create faster/more things in order to make more money, immediately or
>> down the road. Copyright extention therefore means little to the
>> artist. Also most creators (except possibly authors and muscians)
>> sell their creations, including copyright, to others or create under
>> a "work for hire" scenario, so any copyright term is irrelevant.
>>
>> Jayne Sebby
>> jsebby[_at_]unlinfo.unl.edu
>> Nebraska ETV
Received on Mon Apr 29 1996 - 18:20:38 GMT