SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/31/copyright_hub_launch/
The web has grown up without letting people own and control their own stuff, but a British-backed initiative might change all that, offering a glimpse of how the internet can work in the future. Their work will all be open sourced early next year.
Britain's much-anticipated Copyright Hub was given ministerial blessing when it finally opened its kimono today, boasting a pipeline of over 90 projects covering commercial and free uses.
A handy new site – Copyright done right – has also been launched, explaining what it offers. The initiative has sparked global interest.
Today, it turns out that most people actually do want what they’re missing from today’s internet: property rights (or property-ish rights) for the digital stuff they post to the interwebs. But many have found that copyright just doesn’t work for them. The Hub aims to build rights-aware layers on top of the internet, so that people can track how what they make public is used, much as DNS added ease of use to naming protocols and VPNs added privacy standards to the basic bare-bones internet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @09:18PM
If you have put a book in a bookstore/library, you have put your copyright into the public domain.
That is not at all how copyright works. Were someone to either reproduce your website or portions of it, or reproduce your book or portions of it, both would be infringement. Same as with 'shared' mixtapes back in the 80s, or dozens of modern forms of sharing today.
That said, going off that website 'copyrightdoneright.org' I don't have a very good feeling of them doing it for altruistic reasons. And acting like the idea is somehow 'uniquely british' also rubbed me the wrong way (Lots of sites are already doing that on a small scale, some even on a large scale, like github, sourceforge, and various free media projects for open source.)
That said, my problem hasn't been with copyright. It has been with the ever increasing length of copyright. Cap it at 20 or even 30 years and I would accept it. Make it longer than I am likely to live and I have no reason to contaminate myself with copyrighted works which may stake a claim (however tenuous) to my own future creative works. Also, who hasn't had their favorite creative work of their childhood destroyed by now, and wished they could 'fork it' to either be more how they envisioned it, or how the 'non-canon' creative works while it was left untended portrayed it, or how its creator originally intended it before they died/got bought out? (Roddenberry, The BSG guy, and a few others are examples. Lucas fucked shit up before Disney ever got ahold of it.)