On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 10:41:22AM -0800, Lan Barnes wrote: > I completely agree with what you say. However, I cannot understand how > abolishing copyright represents "balance." Giving all rights to the > public, including opportunistic profiteering reproducers, hardly > represents balance, at least as I understand it. Likewise, the current > system of perpetual copyright and increasingly draconian punishment (can > "copyright terrorist enemy combatant" be far from us?) is not balance. The > system is screwed and needs fixing -- but not abolishment. > > IIRC my post had the word "balance" repeatedly, sometimes in short > sentences, once alone. > > So you are agreeing with me :-P
Balance is often a good goal. Fairness too. There are other innovative ways to be fair to creators that perhaps you might like: (*) Set up a revenue collection system, either voluntary or mandatory, to compensate producers during the interm transition period to the new post-copyright system. (*) Use same collection system to continue to give out grants to support ongoing creative works generation. Imagine an NEA or OSDL on steroids. Chris -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
