SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It’s frequently claimed that copyright law should be made more restrictive and copyright terms extended in order to provide an incentive for content creators.
But with growing use of works put into the public domain or released under free and permissive licenses such as Creative Commons or the GPL and its derivatives, it’s possible to argue the opposite — that freely-available works also generate value.
Public domain works — those that exist without restriction on use either because their copyright term has expired or because they fall outside of the scope of copyright protection — create significant economic benefits, according to research my colleagues and I have conducted, now published in a report for the UK government’s Intellectual Property Office. ( https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/copyright-and-the-value-of-the-public-domain )
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:52AM
After all, they were merely standing on the shoulders of giants, 500-plus years of scientific and engineering progress, etc.
In fact they should pay me for using their crappy products!
OTOH what I do for a living deserves to be highly recompensed. It's damn good work, and it's extremely important that people recognize that I spent decades getting the necessary education and on-the-job training, including self-training after hours because I'm a self-starter.
So don't give me this BS that you can easily replace what I do. Plus it's not in the nation's best interest to let their own workers get shoved aside into menial jobs.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:40AM
The original term of copyright was 14 years in the USA.
If you were still alive after that[1], you could apply for one more 14-year term of exclusivity.
After that, your stuff went into the public domain.
The last item in that list is the only thing that happened automatically.
It is now easier than ever to produce and distribute works, yet the term of copyright keeps getting longer, not shorter.
The length of patent protection is in the same ballpark as the Founding Fathers intended.
Now, if we can get the patent clerks to stop approving every damned thing put in front of them.
[1] This was in an era when the extent of medical "science" resulted in George Washington being bled to death by his "doctor" as a "treatment".
-- gewg_
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kaszz on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:51AM
This is an era when the extent of medical "science" results in people being medicated to death by their "doctors salesperson" as a "cure". ;)
Other treatments can also be put into questioning as there is a gatekeeper with vested interests. The absolute lack of it would of course result in mayhem but it doesn't take away the fact there is interests that are not to the patients best interest.
(Score: 1) by rondon on Sunday March 29 2015, @02:48AM
Who the fuck modded this coward insightful (maybe I can check? Still somewhat new to being a member here)? She or he is using satire and a false dichotomy to hide the fact they are espousing a system that rewards rent-seeking and depresses innovation.
Please, please don't fall for the, "everyone will be out of a job if my patent/IP/copyright doesn't last forever and ever and ever!" bullshit line from the people who would love to own you and everyone you know. They don't want your assets, they want ownership of YOU!
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Sunday March 29 2015, @08:02AM
I'm paid for what I do. I'm not paid for what I did in the past (except indirectly, as what I did in the past affects my performance on my current job).
Yes, I publish stuff as part of my work. And no, I don't get a single cent from those publications. I get money to create those publications, though.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.