Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain • Hacker News Board

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#11

Post by grawprog » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 12:53 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #8

DrPhish wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its fair that renewals would be allowed beyond that, but that the cost of doing so should increase on an exponential scale. That way the value of keeping a thing copyrighted would eventually be eclipsed by its value as a public property, fulfilling the social contract of limited protection in exchange for eventual public ownership.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

Have the fee be based time but scale with profits. So that author making 5k/year's fees may only would only have the fee increase by a few hundred per renewal whereas a company making 500k/year would see their fees go up by a few thousand per renewal etc. As an example.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#12

Post by ghaff » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 12:56 AM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #9

ghaff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

Yes, and adds a nice tax to the mix. From the tone of your post, you seem to think this is a problem. If so, why?

So corporations can renew copyrights but not most individuals in practice. That seems problematic. Because, I don't know, the cards are already so stacked against individual content creators we don't want to make things worse?

If we really care about getting the content released to the commons as early as possible, just apply a single shortened date to everyone.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#13

Post by ghaff » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 12:58 AM UTC

grawprog wrote: post #11

ghaff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

Have the fee be based time but scale with profits. So that author making 5k/year's fees may only would only have the fee increase by a few hundred per renewal whereas a company making 500k/year would see their fees go up by a few thousand per renewal etc. As an example.

That introduces a massive accounting element. At least the current system is simple. By all means, shorten copyright terms. But let's not make it a complex mess that no one can really figure out.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#14

Post by danielheath » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:04 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #12

marcosdumay wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and adds a nice tax to the mix. From the tone of your post, you seem to think this is a problem. If so, why?

So corporations can renew copyrights but not most individuals in practice. That seems problematic. Because, I don't know, the cards are already so stacked against individual content creators we don't want to make things worse? If we really care about getting the content released to the commons as early as possible, just apply a single shortened date to everyone.

A single shortened date is a good start.

I don't have a problem with 'buy an extension to copyright', though - that money can fund public goods that benefit everyone.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#15

Post by marcosdumay » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #12

marcosdumay wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and adds a nice tax to the mix. From the tone of your post, you seem to think this is a problem. If so, why?

So corporations can renew copyrights but not most individuals in practice. That seems problematic. Because, I don't know, the cards are already so stacked against individual content creators we don't want to make things worse? If we really care about getting the content released to the commons as early as possible, just apply a single shortened date to everyone.

On the other hand, the more valuable content can in commercial use for longer.

It is as large an obstacle to the hoarding and disappearing of content corporations do today as any alternative, so I'd go for the easiest, whatever that is.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#16

Post by throwawayhhakdl » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:21 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #8

DrPhish wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its fair that renewals would be allowed beyond that, but that the cost of doing so should increase on an exponential scale. That way the value of keeping a thing copyrighted would eventually be eclipsed by its value as a public property, fulfilling the social contract of limited protection in exchange for eventual public ownership.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

Can you name any piece of intellectual property that has a small, recurring income after 30 years?

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#17

Post by throwawayhhakdl » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:24 AM UTC

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #3

I hate zombies and despise zombie movies. If only copyright lasted longer, we would not have had these zombie movies. I used to be in favor of shorter copyrights, but I guess I will have to rethink my support for that given the information in this article.

That is because you have not seen One Cut of the Dead

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Cut_of_the_Dead

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#18

Post by koboll » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:24 AM UTC

grawprog wrote: post #11

ghaff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

Have the fee be based time but scale with profits. So that author making 5k/year's fees may only would only have the fee increase by a few hundred per renewal whereas a company making 500k/year would see their fees go up by a few thousand per renewal etc. As an example.

Then you kick off an arms race where regulators are constantly fighting to keep up with increasingly sophisticated money laundering techniques to obscure how valuable an IP actually is. A lot of money would be siphoned off by lawyers just so they can fight back to a stalemate.

Why make it complicated? Just let works fall into the public domain after a couple decades.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#19

Post by Polylactic_acid » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:31 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #8

DrPhish wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its fair that renewals would be allowed beyond that, but that the cost of doing so should increase on an exponential scale. That way the value of keeping a thing copyrighted would eventually be eclipsed by its value as a public property, fulfilling the social contract of limited protection in exchange for eventual public ownership.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

It makes it cost effective for content which is highly profitable. A corporation isn't going to pay to keep garbage registered at a high fee but an individual will pay to keep something that is raking in mountains of cash. Not that it really matters much because virtually everything stops bringing in any money at all by 30 years. The only things that continue to have value are names and characters.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#20

Post by mjevans » Fri, Feb 28, 2020, 1:37 AM UTC

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #19

ghaff wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That probably makes copyright renewals cost-effective for corporations making millions but not so for an author getting a nice $5k/yr annuity. (Or pick your numbers. But making cost a decision point for renewal definitely favors the big guys.)

It makes it cost effective for content which is highly profitable. A corporation isn't going to pay to keep garbage registered at a high fee but an individual will pay to keep something that is raking in mountains of cash. Not that it really matters much because virtually everything stops bringing in any money at all by 30 years. The only things that continue to have value are names and characters.

The exact names and likenesses might be preserved via Trademark as a form of consumer protection.

Meanwhile, derivative like works could still be created as long as they were clear to not confuse consumers.