Active Users:681 Time:31/10/2024 11:19:46 PM
You know those Jane Austen parodies? Only because Jane Austen is in the public domain. Aeryn Send a noteboard - 04/01/2012 09:32:20 PM
Otherwise, they'd be sued out of existence.

The purpose of copyright protection laws is to allow inventors/creators to profit from their creation, and thus to encourage creativity. But if the protection extends past a reasonable timeframe, it does the opposite. There's no reason to extend copyright protection past an inventor's lifetime.

Reply to message
Why Johnny Can't Read Any New Public Domain Books In The US: Because Nothing New Entered The P.D. - 03/01/2012 11:33:34 PM 1786 Views
I find it difficult to see this as stealing rights from the public. - 04/01/2012 11:15:35 AM 920 Views
Are you arguing for illegal use of legally protected works? - 04/01/2012 09:34:18 PM 849 Views
No. I'm saying that keeping works in copyright doesn't stop them from being read, watched, etc. - 04/01/2012 10:24:50 PM 857 Views
That's not the point, though. - 05/01/2012 01:05:17 PM 903 Views
???? - 05/01/2012 03:22:58 PM 876 Views
Re: ???? - 05/01/2012 04:04:21 PM 918 Views
not to mention public libraries *NM* - 05/01/2012 03:21:04 PM 494 Views
Blame Disney. *NM* - 04/01/2012 05:48:00 PM 629 Views
I don't get it. - 04/01/2012 05:51:19 PM 1139 Views
You know those Jane Austen parodies? Only because Jane Austen is in the public domain. - 04/01/2012 09:32:20 PM 944 Views
Answering you specifically - 05/01/2012 04:57:33 PM 878 Views
But that doesn't make sense. - 05/01/2012 07:18:08 PM 1038 Views
Here's the gist of it. - 06/01/2012 04:18:29 PM 877 Views
Patents and copyrights aren't meant to last forever (shouldn't, anyway) - 04/01/2012 10:33:30 PM 907 Views
I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though. - 05/01/2012 05:01:05 PM 822 Views
Copyrights stifle creativity. - 05/01/2012 07:48:08 PM 910 Views
Re: Copyrights stifle creativity. - 06/01/2012 04:39:24 PM 1305 Views
Re: I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though. - 06/01/2012 12:47:50 AM 840 Views
Why. - 06/01/2012 05:05:20 PM 1453 Views
That is a very confusing article. - 04/01/2012 10:19:22 PM 973 Views
Works published between 1923 and 1978 are different - 04/01/2012 10:25:16 PM 898 Views
Do you think it is right that Disney can protect its movies? - 05/01/2012 05:29:08 PM 850 Views
Ok, what has movies Disney done lately that were on par with its classics? *NM* - 05/01/2012 07:44:20 PM 386 Views
And speaking of Disney's classics... - 05/01/2012 10:06:16 PM 1004 Views
Until Disney discovered and copyrighted them, they obviouslty didn't exist. *NM* - 06/01/2012 12:58:55 AM 422 Views
Except of course they haven't copyrighted them... - 06/01/2012 01:53:01 AM 828 Views
nice theory but you can make a Little Mermaid movie if you want - 06/01/2012 02:48:47 PM 883 Views
Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug* - 05/01/2012 07:57:38 PM 998 Views
Do you really want corporations to be immortal? - 06/01/2012 12:50:11 AM 903 Views
In a sense, aren't they already? - 06/01/2012 02:42:53 AM 991 Views
Re: Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug* - 06/01/2012 01:18:04 AM 899 Views
It's a thorny issue and I largely agree with you - 06/01/2012 02:50:24 AM 924 Views
Huh... apparently, Mickey Mouse is already Public Domain anyway - 06/01/2012 07:30:36 AM 1082 Views
Can you back that up? - 06/01/2012 04:17:35 AM 1022 Views
Re: Can you back that up? - 06/01/2012 06:02:01 PM 815 Views
Re: the piracy issues - 06/01/2012 06:30:46 AM 1013 Views
Book piracy - 06/01/2012 05:21:40 PM 1115 Views
corporations have always had rights - 06/01/2012 04:08:12 PM 866 Views

Reply to Message