No. No Jane Austen parodies come to mind.
It seems to me current copyright timeframes usaully extend beyond most creators' lifetimes, so they profit the entire time. Once they're dead, it's not the copyright laws that discourage creativity, it's death.
A reason to extend copyright protection is so that descendants can reap the benefits. People create wealth in many professions that they pass on to their families in various forms.
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.
It seems to me current copyright timeframes usaully extend beyond most creators' lifetimes, so they profit the entire time. Once they're dead, it's not the copyright laws that discourage creativity, it's death.
A reason to extend copyright protection is so that descendants can reap the benefits. People create wealth in many professions that they pass on to their families in various forms.
Such as? You can pass on wealth itself - after tax. But are pensions passed on? There are harmful effects to copyrights that must be balanced against the benefits. To have a grandchild continue to profit from something, while denying the rest of the world free unencumbered access to that thing - to modify, improve upon, etc., it's not right.
After 50+ years in the public domain, a work begins to belong to the public. Patents also expire, by the way, for the same reason - to allow others to tinker with the same ideas.
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
1873 Views
I find it difficult to see this as stealing rights from the public.
- 04/01/2012 11:15:35 AM
1004 Views
Are you arguing for illegal use of legally protected works?
- 04/01/2012 09:34:18 PM
930 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
907 Views
That's not the point, though.
- 05/01/2012 01:05:17 PM
987 Views
????
- 05/01/2012 03:22:58 PM
955 Views
Re: ????
- 05/01/2012 04:04:21 PM
991 Views
That isn't inspiration that wanting to use the popularity of the original to promote your work
- 05/01/2012 05:04:25 PM
959 Views
I don't get it.
- 04/01/2012 05:51:19 PM
1217 Views
You know those Jane Austen parodies? Only because Jane Austen is in the public domain.
- 04/01/2012 09:32:20 PM
1020 Views
Parody is actually covered by the legal definition of fair use so doesn't break copyright.
- 04/01/2012 10:28:08 PM
1004 Views
I'm fairly sure the Jane Austen parodies do in fact use actual paragraphs... no? *NM*
- 04/01/2012 10:31:32 PM
528 Views
The zombies one doesn't precisely. It's somewhat modernised. I've not read the others.
- 04/01/2012 10:32:59 PM
941 Views
Yes, they take tons of text from actual books. Contrast this with Ms. Rowling's reaction. *NM*
- 05/01/2012 07:01:46 PM
432 Views
If there's zero chance of needing a lawyer at some point, it's way more likely to actually happen.
- 04/01/2012 10:43:23 PM
1036 Views
Answering you specifically
- 05/01/2012 04:57:33 PM
957 Views
But that doesn't make sense.
- 05/01/2012 07:18:08 PM
1126 Views
Patents and copyrights aren't meant to last forever (shouldn't, anyway)
- 04/01/2012 10:33:30 PM
988 Views
I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though.
- 05/01/2012 05:01:05 PM
897 Views
Re: I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though.
- 06/01/2012 12:47:50 AM
923 Views
That is a very confusing article.
- 04/01/2012 10:19:22 PM
1046 Views
Works published between 1923 and 1978 are different
- 04/01/2012 10:25:16 PM
975 Views
Do you think it is right that Disney can protect its movies?
- 05/01/2012 05:29:08 PM
931 Views
Ok, what has movies Disney done lately that were on par with its classics? *NM*
- 05/01/2012 07:44:20 PM
416 Views
And speaking of Disney's classics...
- 05/01/2012 10:06:16 PM
1088 Views
Until Disney discovered and copyrighted them, they obviouslty didn't exist. *NM*
- 06/01/2012 12:58:55 AM
455 Views
OK why is that even a point of argument?
- 06/01/2012 02:42:47 PM
929 Views
No incentive to make great new works if they can just keep re-releasing Lion King in 3D *NM*
- 06/01/2012 09:45:38 PM
500 Views
I'm a lot older than your five year old, but I'm not sure I disagree Tangled is better.
- 06/01/2012 11:12:32 PM
976 Views
Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug*
- 05/01/2012 07:57:38 PM
1079 Views
Re: Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug*
- 06/01/2012 01:18:04 AM
984 Views
Can you back that up?
- 06/01/2012 04:17:35 AM
1103 Views
Re: Can you back that up?
- 06/01/2012 06:02:01 PM
887 Views
Artist/Singers used to *always* be on tour in order to make a living.
- 06/01/2012 09:34:44 PM
1185 Views