Re: copyright expiration as a spur to creativity

Joe Liu <liu3[_at_]law.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> Ah, but in focusing only on the interests of IP creators, you seem to
> be saying that the effectiveness of the term in spurring creativity is
> the only relevant consideration.

     It's the only relevant consideration in the question of will shortening the term increase creative people's incentive to make a living at making and selling their works.

> Consumers of creative works have an interest both in spurring
> creativity and in obtaining widespread access to works that have been
> created. (Hence my suggestion that the views of IP creators on this
> matter should not be conclusive).

     I agree that there are other considerations, but not to the key question in this thread.

> Moreover, as Dan points out, even within the group of IP creators,
> there may be differing views. Authors who have already created their
> works will want more protection, whereas potential creators will want
> both protection for their own works and greater freedom to build off
> prior work. At some point, a long copyright term may work against
> the interests of both consumers and future authors.

     Now this I hadn't thought of. Derivative works are mainly the child of new technologies, in my experience, and people working in those fields may have a different view. However, at workshops here in SF Bay Area, they don't complain all that much about limits on using materials. Instead, they explain that clearing rights will be a major cost, but you have to do it. They seem to have come to terms with it, trading the cost and limitations of clearing rights with the benefit of obtaining long-term protection for their own works.

• Mike Bradley National Writers Union <michael[_at_]vision-soft.com>