Re: Copyright Extension Bill Passes Congress

On 11/02/98, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> On 29 Oct 1998, Tyler Ochoa <tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> wrote:
> >
> > The problem is that a copyrighted work is a public good: its value
> > does not depreciate over time, so the benefits it produces are
> > potentially infinite in duration. Unless we want to to keep track
> > of every authors' heirs for eternity, some time period must be set.
> > In order to reduce transaction costs in later years, a shorter
> > period makes more sense than a longer one; but it must be long
> > enough to produce the number of artistic works we desire.
>
> The theory of copyright value not depreciating over time surprises
> me. In my experience, values change all the time. I would be
> interested in any studies ...

I somewhat overstated my position. A copyright is a public good because it does not depreciate. Tastes may change over time, thereby changing value; but the work itself (as opposed to the physical object in which it is fixed) does not wear out and can potentially last forever. Unlike tangible goods, therefore, a copyright has no finite or natural lifetime. To avoid the transaction costs of locating heirs, its lifetime must therefore be defined.

Tyler T. Ochoa
Associate Professor
Whittier Law School
<tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> Received on Thu Nov 05 1998 - 00:58:23 GMT