On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 09:21, Corey Edwards wrote: > A good article overall. I think he's missing the point on a couple > things though. Mainly he doesn't understand that copyright is not an > inalienable right of an author and its primary purpose is not to provide > income for the rest of an author's life. Indeed, it really only fulfills > its purpose by having a short lifetime. By providing financial > encouragement for a limited time, the author has the resources to create > more works but there's a deadline. Either make up new stuff or get a new > job. > > I would think it to be reasonable to have renewable copyrights for 1 or > 2 extra terms if the author is really having that much success. But if > the copyright isn't helping the author then there's no benefit to > society by having the work kept out of the public domain, and that's the > whole reason we have copyright. > > Corey
I agree, I don't see any reason for a copyright holder to be able to live off of one piece of copyrighted work for 20 years after he is dead. It just seems like a bit much to me. I can't think of any other line of work that offers that kind of compensation. Overall he makes some very good points in his article. I hope he sent a copy to Orrin Hatch, and a few other lawmakers :) Bryan ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
