There are 2 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    I think copyright is way too long. 

    I also don’t know think there should be retroactive laws of any type. 

    • #1
  2. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I think copyright is way too long.

    I also don’t know think there should be retroactive laws of any type.

    I haven’t listened to the podcast yet, so don’t know exactly what this is in response to, but the question of “retroactivity” with regard to Copyright Law, and Disney Copyright in particular, is an interesting one.

    If against retroactive laws of any type, presumably that means films and movies should be under copyright only for the term that was in effect at the time of creation, regardless of any later lengthening of copyright term?  Or is this a protest against the idea of “taking away” lengthened copyrights terms that came after?

    Personally, my opinion has long been that “limited term” means exactly that, and any copyright that exceeds an average human lifespan is by definition not limited.    I think the 28 years plus an extension of 14 that was in place prior to 1978 seemed about right.

    Particularly in light of the extreme length of current copyright law, a lot of “protected” work  has been locked away because nobody is sure  who owns the actual rights to particular works.  I would go with a presumption that anyone claiming copyright violation has to prove their rights, rather than the person accused of violation having to prove the negative.

     

     

    • #2
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.