Re: Snooze/lose (Was: Academics and coursepacks)

On 2 Sep 1998, Bernard Katz <bkatz[_at_]uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>
> I think someone else may have already pointed this out, but it is
> worth repeating. To follow Daniel Schaeffer's point to its logical
> conclusion, there would be NO limit to the term of copyright protection.
> Just because there may be new methods for economic exploitation does
> not mean that the term ought to be extended. For me, this is again
> indicative of the basic difference in how the copyright monopoly is
> perceived as to whether there is a balance to be struck between the
> issues of ownership and public good.

Not only are there new technologies but we can observe the development of major investments by "corporate" authors in all sorts of works that could not have been imagined a century ago. Multimillion dollar investments in copyright properties have produced the leading export of the United States. IP outranks hard goods, soft goods, and perishables. So I think it deserves the highest protection possible -- at home as well as abroad.

> In the 1774 letter to William Strahan that I've already paraphrased
> from, Samuel Johnson also advocates a cumulative series of years of
> protection from the date of publication (including 30 years after death)
> for a total of "about fifty years, a term sufficient to reward the
> writer without any loss to the publick [sic]. In fifty years, far the
> greater number of books are forgotten and annihilated, and it is for the
> advantage of learning that those which fifty years have not destroyed
> should become bona commu- nia, to be used by every scholar as he shall
> think best." (The Letters of Samuel Johnson, ed. R.W. Chapman. Oxford:
> Clarendon Press, 1952. V.1,399)

Johnson should have known that the great classics are subjected to authoritative editing, translations, etc. with new materials claiming copyrights. It was as common then as it is now.

Imagine if this principle were applied to commercial real estate. Landlords and developers would "enjoy" the same instability that compromises the opportunities of authors and publishers. Monumental architecture would be out of the question. Builders would emphasize short-term use rather than permanence in their choice of materials and design.

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY <70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Tue Sep 08 1998 - 13:30:48 GMT