Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

blog.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 95 posts

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#31

Post by BurningFrog »

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #28
Gustomaximus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am ok with copywriter being lifetime plus. Often a creator doesn't see benifits of their material til many decades after creation. And they created this so during their life it seems fair they can use. Patents on the other hand I feel should be dropping in time scale. Technology is advancing more rapidly yet we extend protection no reduce it to match generally faster cycles of development. Shortening patents to 20…

>Often a creator doesn't see benifits of their material til many decades after Is this the common case? It would seem logical that most content makes the most amount of money soon after it comes out. I think for many kinds of content, the first week makes about as much as the rest of the lifetime of sales. And even in the rare case where some content becomes rediscovered after the 30 years, the creator simply needs t…

Yeah, I can't think of a single example.

Usually, I'd guess/assume/overconfidently assert that 90% of revenue happens in the first 5 years. Though I'm open to being corrected.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#32

Post by derekp7 »

marcosdumay wrote: post #15
ghaff wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think the argument is that a corporate entity would be willing to lose a large amount of money by extending copyrights on their back catalog, if only to keep those works from competing with their current offerings that make them loads of money.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#33

Post by 0xcde4c3db »

BurningFrog wrote: post #31
Polylactic_acid wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Often a creator doesn't see benifits of their material til many decades after Is this the common case? It would seem logical that most content makes the most amount of money soon after it comes out. I think for many kinds of content, the first week makes about as much as the rest of the lifetime of sales. And even in the rare case where some content becomes rediscovered after the 30 years, the creator simply needs t…

Yeah, I can't think of a single example. Usually, I'd guess/assume/overconfidently assert that 90% of revenue happens in the first 5 years. Though I'm open to being corrected.

I'm having trouble finding the source (I suspect a brief in Eldred v. Ashcroft), but I recall reading that over 90% of books are out of print within 3 years of their initial publication. I've also seen claims that it's typical for heavily marketed movies and video games to make roughly half of their total revenue in the first week of release, though I'm not sure where to find the actual numbers for that, and it probably doesn't account for re-releases (DVD, "HD remaster", etc.).

edit: Based on skimming some numbers at vgchartz.com, it looks like the basic shape of the claim for heavily marketed video games is right, but the revenue half-life is more like three or four weeks.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#34

Post by jan888 »

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #5

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable."

Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#35

Post by baby »

I love zombies and I don’t really want to watch old movies.

What are you guys list of best zombie movies? I’ve watched a ton in the emule days but unfortunately don’t know the name of most of these.

My favorite weirdly is not a true zombie movie but a parody called shaun of the dead.

Anyway I hope I’m starting a thread of good zombie movies :)

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#36

Post by thereisnospork »

jan888 wrote: post #34
Polylactic_acid wrote: post #5

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

>"because my business model deserves to be profitable"

Why have authors? Or poets? Or scientists? Or SWEs? we don't work for free. Or would you prefer to drive the aforementioned out of business.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#37

Post by baby »

jan888 wrote: post #34
Polylactic_acid wrote: post #5

imo copyright should last 30 years from creation. Thats plenty of time to make a profit and it also allows things to fall in to public domain while they are still culturally relevant. Currently anything made within your lifetime will not be public until well after you have died which is a shame. It would be great if all of the past content which is now slipping in to irrelevancy could be revived by the public domain.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

Patreon is actually changing a lot of that. Kurzgesagt did a video a while back explaining that content copying was bad for their business model, that was before they join patreon. I give every month to them and I never donate besides this and wikipedia. So I’m betting they are making tons of $ through patreon.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#38

Post by mc3 »

thereisnospork wrote: post #36
jan888 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thirty years? Why have copyright at all? I've yet to hear a good argument that doesn't boil down to "because my business model deserves to be profitable." Intellectual property isn't a scarce resource. I look forward to the day we all exploit that. We'll find new business models, ones that take advantage of being able to build on all proir human knowledge, and we'll all be more productive because of it.

>"because my business model deserves to be profitable" Why have authors? Or poets? Or scientists? Or SWEs? we don't work for free. Or would you prefer to drive the aforementioned out of business.

Yep without copyright Google can gobble up most of the web!

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#39

Post by judge2020 »

Polylactic_acid wrote: post #27
fouc wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A number like 30 is far too arbitrary. How can we come up with a less arbitrary approach? Don't forget some people might take years of thinking about a story before ever releasing it publicly. So the cost of creation can vary quite a bit, picking a fixed number ends up being somewhat unfair to many of the creators.

The exact number can be tuned but there is nothing wrong with being somewhat arbitrary. The age we let people drink is arbitrary. Why 18, why not 19 or 17. Its just a number picked to be good enough. >Don't forget some people might take years of thinking about a story before ever releasing it publicly. It applies as soon as you release it publicly. Copyright doesn't instantly apply as soon as an idea pops in to your…

> The age we let people drink is arbitrary

Maybe this was childhood conditioning but I was told 21 is the general age where your brain is fully developed so that drinking alcohol doesn't affect your cognitive growth.

Re: Love Zombies? Thank the Public Domain

#40

Post by onion2k »

SkyBelow wrote: post #21
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.

Wouldn't corporate branding be enough? Even if Mario entered into public domain, Nintendo Mario games would still be the superior choice. It isn't like people would be allowed to claim their game was an official Nintendo Mario game. Profitable IPs would also be able to grow their IP as a means of protection. For example, there would be a significant time lag between when Mario would enter the public domain and Yoshi…

It wouldn't be so much that thousands of people make a Mario game (people do that already) and Nintendo gets screwed as much as EA makes a Mario game and and uses the IP without paying Nintendo anything.

EA being able to freely make "Battlefield Mushroom Kingdom III: Micropayments Edition" would not be a good thing.

Post reply on HN