Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 6546199" data-attributes="member: 3400">Let's consider all of the various alternative takes on Shakespeare that are out there - from annotated versions to manga to Kurosawa. All of those are possible because Shakespeare is public domain. Now, imagine if Shakespeare's works had an infinitely renewable copyright owned by some British megacorporation (or even the crown). How much work did that corporation put into creating Shakespeare's work? None, yet they would own the copyright just as much as Shakespeare would have in his own lifetime. Would they deserve it? Would Shakespeare's descendants? Copyright is intended to enable a creator to gain exclusive economic benefit from their own creation. That's why, as of 1978, it was already pretty long. But past a certain point, why should the ability to use that creation remain exclusive? Shouldn't second waves be allowed to riff off it in their own creative ways?Put another way, the Sonny Bono copyright extension raises the power of corporations to control IP - not so much personal creators themselves. Most are unlikely to live long enough to see the effect of the extension - but corporations who buy up the rights sure will. And will again the next time some Hollywood-connected legislator puts up the next copyright extension act just before Steamboat Willy hits public domain.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 6546199, member: 3400"] Let's consider all of the various alternative takes on Shakespeare that are out there - from annotated versions to manga to Kurosawa. All of those are possible because Shakespeare is public domain. Now, imagine if Shakespeare's works had an infinitely renewable copyright owned by some British megacorporation (or even the crown). How much work did that corporation put into creating Shakespeare's work? None, yet they would own the copyright just as much as Shakespeare would have in his own lifetime. Would they deserve it? Would Shakespeare's descendants? Copyright is intended to enable a creator to gain exclusive economic benefit from their own creation. That's why, as of 1978, it was already pretty long. But past a certain point, why should the ability to use that creation remain exclusive? Shouldn't second waves be allowed to riff off it in their own creative ways? Put another way, the Sonny Bono copyright extension raises the power of corporations to control IP - not so much personal creators themselves. Most are unlikely to live long enough to see the effect of the extension - but corporations who buy up the rights sure will. And will again the next time some Hollywood-connected legislator puts up the next copyright extension act just before Steamboat Willy hits public domain. [/QUOTE]

Verification