Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NO! Groups? What about individuals? And there IS an inherent right!
I'm an artist and I paint. I make reproductions and sell my work. If a copyright is only twenty years and some big company comes along and reproduces my work, there goes my retirement income. As for after death, I still want to care for my children and their children. Anything that I own, even copyright, is passed down to them.
I think the time frame is fine just the way it is.
Also, patent was mentioned. A patent is totally different than copyright, and both are different than a trademark.
Yes, patent is for the creation of something new and different.
Movies, books, art etc. can not be patented, it can only be copyrighted.
In order to hold a patent, it needs to be registered. Copyright can be registered too, but not required. Registering a copyright is what makes a court case short and sweet. But unregistered copyright can be a battle if the creator did not take other steps to solidify that the work is originally theirs.
Your paintings are probably beautiful but I feel confused you write your works are reproductions. You are copying the works of others then?
So ... Using that "logic", if I published a book when I'm 30, I should no longer earn income from that book when I'm 80 and beyond.
Yeah, that makes all kinds of sense. Not.
You are missing the fact that intellectual property is property. It is owned by the person who created it, until the owner sells or otherwise disposes of that property, or until statute deems otherwise, as in U.S. copyright laws.
On the other hand, why should a film, a music composition, an invention, or a book pass into public ownership? What right does the public have to own these pieces of property?
Perhaps a copyright should not extend past the owners' deaths; I don't know, although perhaps heirs do have a right to inherit intellectual property as well as tangible property. However, to terminate ownership of property while the owner is still alive just ain't right.
I'm not writing books to benefit anyone but myself. Not sure where you get the idea that authors, inventors, etc. should create for the public good?
We're making those arguments; you're just choosing to ignore them.
The public does now own anything nobody does it is open to all. The whole idea of copyright ending at the owners death makes me uncomfortable because people do not all die at the same age or time. I can envision someone waiting around for the copyright holder to die to be able to have free use of the creations. Not good . What if someone murders the copyright holder so it happens quicker? Murders have happened for all kinds of weird reasons.
We have to think of a reasonable length of time . Not too long and not too short. Right now it is not reasonable in my view.
I still think he should be entitled to at least a part of the profit, though it is at least a start that he is given the credit for it.
If he feels entitled to part of the profits then he needs to make that clear in the contract before he signs it. Perhaps offer his services for free with the stipulation he gets the patent and they get a license for whatever. If you want to make the big bucks on something like this you need some skin in the game.
When you are in business you need to take calculated risks to make money. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. For every good idea like this there is a plethora of ones that have failed. In this case all the risk is apparently on the company hence the reason they get to enjoy all the profits.
Yes we should shorten copyrights. Special interests have managed to change the law so that copyrights now last way longer then they should.
Special interests? Or content creators/owners?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
The creations now last for the entire life of the author plus an extra 70 years. I think that is ridiculous. What is the purpose of that? Every first day of the new year the created works whose copyright expired become available for public domain. I would like to see more become available.
There is nothing ridiculous about that. It's really not a long time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
The constitutional purpose of copyright was to allow the authors and creators to benefit financially from their works not to allow big business and wealthy families to benefit long after the creator of the work is dead.
Originally the copyright act in 1909 was 28 years with the option to extend for another 28 years for a total of 56 years. Then it was prolonged I was especially frustrated by the Sonny Bono copyright extension act timed to help Walt Disney profit from Winnie the Pooh that extended the time of copyrights
Who do you think the owners are? They're big business and a lot of wealthy families. It's about content creators controlling their property.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
Is it any wonder that so many people routinely violate copyright protections since the rules have become so greedy and unfair?
Has nothing to do with copyright protections and everything to do with a lot of self entitled people. Whether copyright protection is 5 years or 500 years, the same people would be stealing others work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
The same rights to it everyone should have after a reasonable amount of time and just as much as a place like Disney to a story like Winnie the Pooh they did not create or even relatives that had nothing to do with creating it either. This is no longer a reasonable amount of time and it no longer benefits just the person who created it .Copyrights were intended to benefit society by encouraging creativity and scientific progress by offering a financial benefit to the creators of it.Keeping a hold on it for the entire life of the person plus 70 years after their death does not benefit society or the public as much as sharing it would . The original 28-56 years is long enough for the financial benefit of the creator of the work. It is time after that to stop being greedy and share it with the world.
Do not forget that people working for big companies often do not even get that much . Everything they create is the property of the company they work for. They have no financial claim on it, if anything is unfair that is.Compared to that the original law seems more than generous.
You share this opinion because you've never created anything.
If you ever create anything, soon as you see people start stealing your creation, your feelings will change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
The U.S. Constitution. See Article I; Section 8; Clause 8. Copyrights may only be given for a limited period of time by Congress. Congress doesn't necessarily have to give copyright protection at all is the way that I read the Article. If it does, it has every right to limit the number of years that protection shall exist for.
The "inherent right" you speak does not exist other than to the degree Congress chooses to recognize it. I've quoted the Constitution. You quote me a source that says that "all copyrights exist forever". It doesn't exist in this country or in any other country that I know of. It exists for a term of years that is determined by a legislative body.
Your argument is weak. You still have not answered why you are entitled to other peoples work.
The inherent right for property owners to protect their property from you stealing it is the same as their right to protect their home from you, their vehicle from you, any of their belongings from you.
Congress sets the laws, people want their property protected from theft, so they made copyright laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonGecko
Copyrights ARE too long. I do agree with letting them run for the entire lifetime of the author (for a book, play, or filmscript, or other literary work) plus some reasonable amount of time, with a minimum of 30 years.
But lifetime plus 75 years is ludicrous and benefits no one, not even the publisher. The fact is that the majority of books become dated rather quickly and are usually of interest only to a handful of enthusiasts. Few people read P.G. Wodehouse these days outside of the odd English literature class.
The publishing industry, like the music industry, is undergoing a major upheaval that the commercial concerns that have historically controlled the money - and copyrights, and royalties - do not yet fully understand. Basically, they are still making buggy whips, while people are abandoning horse drawn carriages for automobiles.
Copyrights will change with the times - they will have to. And part of that change will be that there is no real impetus for an author to want to extend his copyright 75 years beyond his or her own lifetime. Corporate publishing firms want that. And those are dinosaurs on their way out.
Perhaps not some authors, but books are a very small part of copyrights. These copyrights are somebodies property. As I asked another poster, what gives you the right to help yourself to someone else's property? When you die, would it be fair for the public to take what they want from your property, or even the whole property, before it went to your heirs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
Yes they put up the money and provided him the help to create his idea, but it is still his idea his brain that had the creative spark, and if he had started it all himself and gotten investors to help contribute those investors would not have been able to take all the profit if it was successful, yet this company can. I still think he should be entitled to at least a part of the profit, though it is at least a start that he is given the credit for it.
Then he should have requested a different contract before starting the work. He has nobody to blame but himself.
For reasons that some articulate, I think they should last even longer.
I think they are plenty long and could be scaled back some. Perhaps just set it to the authors life or 70 years, whichever is longer. Abuses of the sytem need to be adressed, specifically the companies buying up copyrights of images that have been widely used. The original author did not enforce copyright but never actually licensed it for public use either, they sue whoever is using it.
What really needs to be addressed is patent law and patent abuses. Many technologies are evolving so fast by the time the patent expires it's obsolete and that is not the intention of patent law. Then you have the abuses where people file patents on simple things hoping someone is going to use it. Then there is the absurd, one of the patent lawsuits between Apple and Samsung involved the rounded corners on icons.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 04-06-2015 at 11:17 PM..
Reason: Removed icon
I think they are plenty long and could be scaled back some. Perhaps just set it to the authors life or 70 years, whichever is longer. Abuses of the sytem need to be adressed, specifically the companies buying up copyrights of images that have been widely used. The original author did not enforce copyright but never actually licensed it for public use either, they sue whoever is using it.
You've owned your house long enough. Starting tomorrow, anyone that wants can move into your house and use it. You'll also have to leave the keys in your car. Anyone that wants to use it, is free to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
What really needs to be addressed is patent law and patent abuses. Many technologies are evolving so fast by the time the patent expires it's obsolete and that is not the intention of patent law. Then you have the abuses where people file patents on simple things hoping someone is going to use it. Then there is the absurd, one of the patent lawsuits between Apple and Samsung involved the rounded corners on icons.:
That I can agree with.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 04-06-2015 at 11:18 PM..
Reason: Edited quote
You've owned your house long enough. Starting tomorrow, anyone that wants can move into your house and use it. You'll also have to leave the keys in your car. Anyone that wants to use it, is free to do so.
Copyrights and patents are a fundamental part of our society, they are intended to make sure the author/inventor can be compensated for their work so they have incentive to create. They are also intended to make sure knowledge and technology flow into society in a timely manner for all to benefit. Copyrights do not just involve entertainment works.
The question is what's a timely manner for copyright? The current system is excessive IMO and let's face it the primary beneficiaries of these extensions to copyright are large companies like Walt Disney etc.
Copyrights and patents are a fundamental part of our society, they are intended to make sure the author/inventor can be compensated for their work so they have incentive to create. They are also intended to make sure knowledge and technology flow into society in a timely manner for all to benefit. Copyrights do not just involve entertainment works.
The question is what's a timely manner for copyright? The current system is excessive IMO and let's face it the primary beneficiaries of these extensions to copyright are large companies like Walt Disney etc.
Well yeah. Guess what... They own the copyrights. It's their right to profit from it.
I could understand peoples problems if there wasn't the ability to gain the right to use copyrighted material/technology/whatever in exchange for a payment.
But by and large it sounds like people just don't want to pay for something, and expect to use other peoples work for free. Be they dead or alive, copy rights belong to someone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
