Re: Contract as a substitute for copyright (Was: Re: copyright expiration...)

On 22 Sep 1998, Kerry L. Konrad <K_KONRAD[_at_]stblaw.com> wrote:
>
> But that's my point: if contract were the next best alternative, at
> least some significant proportion of authors (which might well vary
> for authors of different types of works) would choose not to
> distribute generally, which would not be socially beneficial. That
> there are limitations on the effectiveness of a contractual scheme
> does not necessarily imply to me that all authors would therefore
> publish with no protection whatsoever in the absence of statutory
> copyright. Take the software industry for example: if copyright
> did not cover computer programs, would the software companies be
> more likely to sell their programs in the public domain or to try
> to find a way to tighten up the contracts, even if that meant
> charging more to fewer people?

Whenever return on investment is seen as elusive, the investors run. Some authors may be genetically predestined to write their books and music while working a day job clerking for Customs or selling insurance. Without security in copyright, I don't think we would have publishers who must spend money on staff, advertising, production, etc.

Without security in leases and ownership, you would not have the malls and office buildings we like so much. What would life be like without such rights and protection of rights?

Albert Henderson, Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY <70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Thu Sep 24 1998 - 02:02:05 GMT