Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 9535521" data-attributes="member: 19675">There’s a difference between an adaptation and a new creation based on the original IP.For example, I’ve seen Shakespeare plays staged or filmed as modern gang war stories,  westerns, WW2-ish dramas, and classic sci-fi.  That’s just staging; not really actionable.OTOH, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead is not merely a rearrangement of Hamlet, it tells a story The Bard probably never would have written.  Arguably, it might be found to violate Stratford Bill’s copyright.Then there’s things like Jimmy Smith’s jazz version of “Peter & The Wolf” that is so deconstructed that you’d be forgiven for not recognizing that it was very much based on Prokofiev’s original.  Trying to prove that in a court of law might prove daunting There’s no such thing as “effectively unending copyright”.  Longer than a typical human’s lifespan? Certainly.  But every copyright eventually falls into the public domain.  That it may do so when you’re inconveniently dead is not germane.Note: I am not and have never advocated for eternal copyright.  Let’s not raise that straw man again, even as a preamble.As to the real question- “what duration is fair?”- is clearly controversial.  As a creator and advocate, my bias is in favor of longer durations (obviously).  It’s not that I can’t see or understand the counterpoints; I just don’t see them as outweighing the interests of IP creators.</blockquote>

Verification