Re: Copyright Extension Bill Passes Congress

From: James Rogers <jetan[_at_]ionet.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 11:43:19 -0600 (CST)

On 11/2/98, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> On 1 Nov 1998, James Rogers <jetan[_at_]ionet.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/30/98, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I would be interested in your evidence supporting, "these writers
> > > could not exist if they were not allowed to copy...."
> >
> > Shakespeare drew on many, many sources for his work... Plutarch,
> > Boccaccio and Saxe Grammaticus being notable. In the case of Plutarch,
> > the copying sometimes verges on the verbatim, as in some passages in
> > _Antony and Cleopatra_. He also appears to have based several of the
> > plays on still earlier plays by other authors. There is quite a bit
> > of literature treating this topic in depth.
>
> I find no copyright infringement here -- certainly no massive
> photocopying.

     Sigh. Taking a plot can be infringing. Borrowing dialogue can be infringing. I think that it is beyond reasonable debate that, under today's laws and standards, Shakespeare would be considered an infringer. However, this was not the original question. The original question was whether a too stingy application of copyright, as exemplified by perpetual term, etc, can stifle creativity. Someone referred to Shakespeare and Hawthorne (_Twice Told Tales_) as supporting examples.

     I am mystified by your reference to photocopying. What bearing could photocopying have on the originality or derivative quality of Shakespeare's work?

                             James

James Michael Rogers
jetan[_at_]ionet.net
Mundus Vult Decipi Received on Tue Nov 03 1998 - 17:42:22 GMT