November 30, 2004
Copyright: Kahle v. Ashcroft
Learned something about copyright that I didn't know before (because I was born in 1980): Kahle v. Ashcroft is asking that copyright go back to the way it was before 1976 where copyright was granted on request only and placed the burden on the copyright owner. Today, copyright is granted implicitly without burden. This is interesting.
I don't really know if I have a problem with copyright being granted implicitly so long as there's an expiration. I do know that the current trend towards infinite copyright is a real problem. An excellent story about this is Melancholy Elephants by Spider Robinson. (He's one of my favorite authors.) Part of the problem is basing copyright's expiration on death. People live longer today, and companies count as legal entities with the potential to never die.
Part of what this lawsuit is asking for, however, is that since some works are abandoned by their copyright owners, that work is "lost" to the world until the copyright expires. The owner has decided never to do anything with the work, but no one else can reproduce it or distribute it or derive other works from it without the owner's express permission. I can see a problem there. Maybe not much of a problem if copyright expired after a short time.
Posted by josuah at November 30, 2004 11:27 PM UTC+00:00
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.wesman.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/62
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)