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

What will enter the public domain in 2026?

publicdomainreview.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 383 posts

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#191

Post by psychoslave »

mlrtime wrote: post #140
psychoslave wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I would need to choose only between UBI and high taxes on the rich I would choose the latter There no need to be exclusive, and actually having concentration of wealth in a few hands is already a social construct. A society can also thrive without high income disparities. Taxing the rich is just taxing on what was captured from the non-rich.

>captured from the non-rich. What do you mean by this? The economy is not zero sum, it is possible for everyone to get "wealthier", even if the spread increases.

People that can be taxed at several order of magnitude of wealth compared to a median income obviously didn’t work several degree of magnitude harder/longer/smarter. They more "efficiently" capture the benefits, certainly, but that’s it. And even there, mainly through network effect and pre-existing social forces.

If instead distribution of wealth was flatter in an equally wealthy society, a tax could still capture just as much.

When vladms speaks about high taxes on the rich, it already assumes the continuation of social structure which exaggerates the uneven distribution of wealth.

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#192

Post by VikingCoder »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #58

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…

I like the idea I heard about taxing based on the owner's view of value.

Give 14 years free.

Every year after that, the copyright holder has to tell you how much they think the work is worth to them. Then you tax them some (smallish) percentage of that.

Or, you can run some public fund-raiser to raise the amount of money they said it was worth, pay off the copyright holder, and then the work is in the public domain.

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#193

Post by mlrtime »

GeoAtreides wrote: post #157
mlrtime wrote: post #151

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?

I think it's selective outrage and people really don't care what happens to Micky Mouse.

I'm not a fan of Disney, but I don't think my life would be better if we saw a bunch of clones from China because it's now "public domain".

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#194

Post by vladms »

psychoslave wrote: post #103
vladms wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I would need to choose only between UBI and high taxes on the rich I would choose the latter, because it would reduce the risk of entrenching the differences or giving too much power to a few. I find more important what is the society's perceived "success" in life. For US (one of the two countries in the study), as a foreigner, I perceive that "success" is considered to be "the self made man". So people feel valua…

>If I would need to choose only between UBI and high taxes on the rich I would choose the latter There no need to be exclusive, and actually having concentration of wealth in a few hands is already a social construct. A society can also thrive without high income disparities. Taxing the rich is just taxing on what was captured from the non-rich.

It is about the practicality of convincing people to do something. Many people I know are inert and would say no to change. Even those that want change have a favorite topic.

So, personally, when discussing economic topics I discuss the taxes part, which is so clearly unjust when explained (most countries tax less capital gains than work, which results in rich people able to accumulate things faster).

Additionally, I am not convinced that me or you know exactly what will work - humans are complex. So while I hope that it is possible to have "A society can also thrive without high income disparities.", proposing too many changes at once might result in an undesired result. There are enough examples in history where good intentions led to catastrophes.

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#195

Post by thfuran »

nkrisc wrote: post #186
InfiniteRand wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean https://www.printingcenterusa.com/printing/book-printing

Someone who buys books at Barnes & Noble is not going to print online fan fiction on demand. If you think this is something a “mainstream consumer” would do, I think you’re very out of touch with the average person.

Isn’t reading stuff on the internet more mainstream than buying things at Barnes and Noble? Not necessarily those specific things, but the notion that something needs to be physically available at a bookstore to be relevant is at best dated.

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#196

Post by mlrtime »

psychoslave wrote: post #191
mlrtime wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>captured from the non-rich. What do you mean by this? The economy is not zero sum, it is possible for everyone to get "wealthier", even if the spread increases.

People that can be taxed at several order of magnitude of wealth compared to a median income obviously didn’t work several degree of magnitude harder/longer/smarter. They more "efficiently" capture the benefits, certainly, but that’s it. And even there, mainly through network effect and pre-existing social forces. If instead distribution of wealth was flatter in an equally wealthy society, a tax could still capture j…

This is great in theory, but not practice and not practiced anywhere. You could site some EU countries with a very homogeneous population and a GDP I don't think we currently have the most efficient tax vs productivity situation now, but I don't agree with equality being the goal.

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#197

Post by boomboomsubban »

93po wrote: post #183
kec wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you describe would almost certainly be considered fair use until point of distribution - it’s non commercial, transformative and has no meaningful impact on the market value of Harry Potter. Copies for private use are going to be similar, and while I’m not a lawyer it feels like it’d be a hard case to make that work being conducted in private is going to have a meaningful impact on the market for Nancy Drew nove…

Market harm is not required for something to count as infringement, but it matters for certain defenses and damages. Simply writing new adventures for existing copyrighted characters is usually treated as creating an unauthorized derivative work. Writing Harry Potter from the perspective of the Weasley twins, for example, is not fair use. Distribution is one part of fair use but it isn't the focus of it - fair use is…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#4._Effect_upon_work's...

Seems to say that market harm is the single most important factor in fair use, and it's basically impossible to show that a person writing their own fan fiction without any distribution would prevent an author from exploiting their own work.

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#198

Post by bnj »

sp0rk wrote: post #178
Aromasin wrote: post #101

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…

> Fantasy book are a good example. A Games of Thrones was first released in 1996 but had middling success. It was only after 2011 that the series exploded in popularity. Good Omens main peak was ~15 years after release. Hell, some books like Handmaiden's Tale were published in 1985 but only reached their peak in 2010. Using your example and the rules suggested in the grandparent post, GRRM's copyright would have been…

Keep in mind that under such a system, corporations would have a financial incentive to wait just a bit longer to do an adaptation

Re: What will enter the public domain in 2026?

#200

Post by marcosdumay »

mchusma wrote: post #60
bcrosby95 wrote: post #58

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…

I love the original 14+14. I’ve heard proposals for exponentially growing fees to allow truly big enterprises to stay copywritten longer, like 14+14 with filing and $100, another 14 for $100,000, another 14 for $10M, another 14 for $100M. That would allow 70 years or protection for a few key pieces of IP that are worth it, which seems like an okay trade off? So many ideas better than the current regime.

> So many ideas better than the current regime.

Almost every idea is better than the current regime. Maybe even completely cancelling the concept. The same applies to patents, where there's no "maybe", cancelling the concept is clearly better than what we have.

The governments all over the world have been so incredibly corrupt since the 80s, that they managed to confiscate almost every public good in existence.

Post reply on HN