Lost
-
The Internet Archive lost a legal case:
https://www.vulture.com/article/internet-archive-hachette-lawsuit.html
I think we need copyright reform. A couple of reasons:
- While a writer needs to profit from his work, I see no reason where he should profit from it long, long after his death. I think 25 years after the author's death is adequate.
- Public domain enriches the mind of the public. Availability increases ability and ability increases the intelligence of the reading public, no matter their financial station.
-
Counter arguments:
If I build a building, I can keep charging rent as long as the building is serviceable. Why can I not keep getting royalty from my intellectual property as long as the property is serviceable?
If the public keeps benefiting from my intellectual properties, why should I not continue to profit from my intellectual properties?
Personally, I also want to limit the longevity of copyrights, but I am still struggling to find a principle by which I can rely on to resolve the two questions posed above, much less one that lets me determine the proper duration for copyrights.
-
Even with "perpetual" copyrights, there may be a way to make intellectual properties affordable and publicly accessible. For example: after X years, a copyrighted work maybe freely reproduced and made available according to a licensing fee structure prescribed by law. (Granted it will get complicated for derived works, but there may be solution there too.)
