Book People Archive

Re: [WP editorial] Copyright Craziness [rant]


  Dear Tony Kline,

  While I disagree with it, I'll answer it:

  The typical answer goes like this:
  Copyright beyond the lifetime of the creator ensures that the
  copyright owners' children can benefit from the work.

  Of course, I have never met an artist or inventor who has ever
  said, "Well, I was thinking about writing (or inventing), but
  since my children can't benefit from it after I'm dead, I guess
  I won't write this book." I suppose someone could say, "But
  what about elderly people, who are considering writing their
  memoirs?" In that case, I find that a flat duration, say-
  30 years, should help your children out as well, and we can
  reap the harvest of geriatric authors well and hearty.

  My personal perspective is that if your book doesn't make you
  a return on investment over 30 years, it's not going to make
  you an ROI over 170 years either. And if it DID, it wouldn't
  be worth it to exchange the very rare and occasional ROI
  in exchange for depriving the entire world (including your
  children) of 150 years of concurrent books.

  I believe the vast majority of books and songs are owned by
  equity lords, who just sit on these things and get upset if
  the books suddenly "lose value". They bought them fair and
  square, and intend to reap them for all they're worth. There
  is a degree of work involved- they have to convince congress
  every now and then to give them their due by extending
  (c)opyright.

  The vast majority of our society believes that if you have
  thought something up, /you own it/. Everyone entertains the
  pet notion that they are going to write a book, think of
  an idea, or make a song, and it will revolutionize the world,
  and God Damn if someone is not going to give them their due.
  I suspect it's similar in motivation to the sue craze.

  Take care,
    Lion =^_^=