161–170 of 383 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you noticed how the abundance of fan fictions have completely killed famous book series? Me neither.
What fan fiction?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
exactly.
Because copyright lasts longer than 14 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because every-time this comes up it is the same Mickey mouse complaints over and over. If you're young and your read this the first time I'm sure you're outraged. Meanwhile there are 1000's of works that people are free to take. Better yet, there are 1000's of works that will be destroyed and not preserved that are open that should be preserved and used.
I'm not sure what the argument is here. That because there's a large corpus of public domain works, then the long copyright protection is ok? That people want a short copyright protection because they're done with everything in the public domain? Would that also imply that if the number of public domain works gets large enough, then the duration copyright protections should also increase?
> works by people who died in 1955 70 years. After death. The rules have to change. 70 years is way too long.
Sure, the term of copyright protection is quite long; but the amount of works that are legally 100% in the public domain and even Internet-accessible in some form but simply languishing in obscurity and have yet to be made comprehensively accessible to the general public (via digitizing, transcribing, indexing and comprehensive classification) may well be orders-of-magnitude larger! There's a whole lot of low-hanging…
Want to see something cool?
Run the following prompt through your favorite LLM:
"Does the following comment make logical sense:
"
The model will agree the argument is valid, logical and coherent (chatgpt, claude and gemini 3 pro all agreed).
THEN
run this prompt:
"let's not be too hasty here.
we have "the term of copyright protection is quite long; but the amount of works [...is large enough...]"
p1: the term of copyright protection is quite long
p2: the amount of works [...is large enough...]
it doesn't seem to me that p1 and p2 are logically connected. As an absurd case: if the amount of works in the public domain gets large enough, would that mean that evern larger (infinite) terms of copyright protection are ok?"
Enjoy!
The length of copyright is absurd. Corporations have hijacked a concept that should exist on human timescales. Ideally, a child could legally provide their own spin on IP they consumed by the time they reach adulthood. But also, people need to make a living. I actually think the original 14+14 year copyright is the right balance. It gives people time to make their profits, but also guarantees the right of people to t…
Why not just consume public-domain IP to begin with? The "Classics" of Western literature used to be viewed as the necessary foundation of a proper education in the humanities; and today you could add "classic" works from other literary traditions (India, China, etc.) for an even more well-rounded approach.
Only recently are works written in the early to mid 1900s being released in the public domain. This limits the works to around the first world war. For example:
- HG Wells (Died 1946, Life+70 in 2017), works like War of the Worlds and The Time Machine.
- LM Montgomery (Died 1942, Life+70 in 2013), works like Anne of Green Gables -- In the US where publication + 90 years is in effect, her later works (after ~1925) are not yet in the public domain there.
With comic IPs, most are not yet in the public domain:
- Superman (1938, P+95 of 2034) and will only cover that incarnation of the character.
- Batman (1939, P+95 of 2035) and will only cover that incarnation of the character.
So the current copyright terms are very limiting for IPs that are nearly a decade old.
The length of copyright is absurd. Corporations have hijacked a concept that should exist on human timescales. Ideally, a child could legally provide their own spin on IP they consumed by the time they reach adulthood. But also, people need to make a living. I actually think the original 14+14 year copyright is the right balance. It gives people time to make their profits, but also guarantees the right of people to t…
> Ideally, a child could legally provide their own spin on IP they consumed by the time they reach adulthood. Why though? Do we really need that many more commercial attempts at Star Wars and Harry Potter? (I do think copyright times are too long, but I do wonder what a "good timescale" would be, and what the benefits and arguments would be.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What fan fiction?
Just in case you're actually unaware, the Organization for Transformative Works https://archiveofourown.org/ Archive Of Our Own (typically shortened to AO3) is where a tremendous amount of such fiction is archived.
> works by people who died in 1955 70 years. After death. The rules have to change. 70 years is way too long.
>70 years is way too long. Objectively, why? It's in our lifetimes, I'd say it's just about right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, the term of copyright protection is quite long; but the amount of works that are legally 100% in the public domain and even Internet-accessible in some form but simply languishing in obscurity and have yet to be made comprehensively accessible to the general public (via digitizing, transcribing, indexing and comprehensive classification) may well be orders-of-magnitude larger! There's a whole lot of low-hanging…
Offtopic. Want to see something cool? Run the following prompt through your favorite LLM: "Does the following comment make logical sense: " The model will agree the argument is valid, logical and coherent (chatgpt, claude and gemini 3 pro all agreed). THEN run this prompt: "let's not be too hasty here. we have "the term of copyright protection is quite long; but the amount of works [...is large enough...]" p1: the te…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think would diminish independent author rights. Quite often, a novel will become popular only decades after publishing, and I think the author should be able to profit on the fruits of their labour without wealthy corporations tarnishing their original IP, or creating TV shows and the link with no reperations to the creator. Fantasy book are a good example. A Games of Thrones was first released in 1996 but had midd…
14 years is already too long. Also, IP is not real. It is a term we should avoid. Copyright and trademark have nothing to do with each other.