[LINK] copyright extension
Kim Holburn
kim at holburn.net
Tue Dec 12 10:28:07 AEDT 2006
Interesting take on copyright:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061208-8384.html
> Copyright extension: the dead want inspiration too
>
> 12/8/2006 11:58:34 AM, by Ken Fisher
>
> Buried in the massive tome of recommendations that is the UK's
> Gowers Review (previously covered) was one extremely important
> recommendation, one that touches the very soul of the concept of
> copyrights. Nate briefly mentioned this earlier in the week, but I
> think it's worth more attention, partly because of recent
> (hilarious) developments. I quote from the Review:
>
> "Recommendation 4: Policy makers should adopt the principle
> that the term and scope of protection for IP rights should not be
> altered retrospectively."
>
> Why is this so important? Copyright was born to "balance" the
> public goods of access and education with the private goods of
> ownership and incentive. When copyright was introduced to the world
> with the Statute of Anne in 1710, its purpose was defined at the
> very outset:
>
> "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the
> Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or Purchasers of such
> Copies, during the Times therein mentioned" (emphasis added)
>
> The question was how to encourage authors to write so that the
> public can benefit. The solution was simple: give authors a period
> of limited monopoly over their works, after which they belong to
> the public. This initial period was 14 to 21 years. You, the
> theoretical author, are supposed to think, "well, 14 years is good,
> so maybe I will just write this book!" Or something like that.
>
> Gowers' recommendation is fundamental to respecting the true
> purpose of copyright because it acknowledges the point of copyright
> as an incentive. Changing copyright terms may be fine and dandy,
> but if an author has already created a work, copyright has already
> served its primary purpose of providing incentive. Copyright
> continues to protect said work, of course, but that's how it
> accomplishes the incentive: a limited period of protection. When
> viewed in this light, retroactive extensions are non-sense. The
> "incentive" has already done its work.
Even more interesting considering that the RIAA wants to lower
royalties to artists:
http://au.gear.ign.com/articles/749/749883p1.html
--
Kim Holburn
IT Network & Security Consultant
Ph/F: +61 2 62577881 M: +61 417820641
mailto:kim at holburn.net aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request
Democracy imposed from without is the severest form of tyranny.
-- Lloyd Biggle, Jr. Analog, Apr 1961
More information about the Link
mailing list