"Emily L. Ferguson" <elf@xxxxxxxx> writes: > And actually, I see no reason that the creator should ever have to > part with his/her copyright. Just because Disney is one of the > world's creators doesn't mean that permanent copyright is a bad > concept. But there are plenty of *other* reasons it's a bad concept! First of all, the whole bargain of intellectual property is broken by making it permanent. That bargain is, protection for a period in return for disclosure. Second, the chain of ownership almost always gets broken or lost somewhere in the first 100 yeras. One of the major difficulties in preparing certain kinds of anthologies for publication is locating the rights owners. > Jsut because I put out the effort and skill to acquire a piece of real > estate doesn't mean that 70 years after I die it should revert to > public domain. I agree. It should be no more than 50 at the absolute maximum. -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
