Re: Copyright Extension Bill Passes Congress

Christopher A. Mohr <chrismohr[_at_]sprintmail.com> wrote:
>
> Although not a big fan of term extension, I disagree with this
> interpretation. Say, for example, that an author comes up with a
> brilliant (and lucrative) creation when he or she is 74 years of age.
> Why would a corporation pay for it? Why not wait until the author
> dies and then take it for free?? Prices for works would probably
> be set using actuarial tables. The only entities which would
> benefit from such an arrangement are the corporations for which
> works were made for hire. (and how does one set the term in the
> case where an author is a business entity??). The economic incentives
> for people to create toward the end of their lives (when, supposedly,
> they have "perfected" their craft) dwindles.

Ask anyone who's had to seek copyright clearance on a work -- expiry on death, or expiry based on date of death, is a very difficult basis to administer intangible property rights on.

I've seen anecdotal evidence that the economic life of much published material is less than four years. The 1909 copyright term of 28 years, with one extention, seems a reasonable duration protecting both the author's rights, the immediate heir's rights, as well as the interests of society and the issue of administering the whole mess.

-- 
Karsten M. Self (kmself[_at_]ix.netcom.com)

    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    Welchen Teil von "Gestalt" verstehen Sie nicht?

web:       http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/
SAS/Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html    

  1:51am  up 1 day, 19:33,  4 users,  load average: 0.43, 0.37, 0.33