Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

US Congress Wrestling Copyright Law

Discuss Slyck's latest news
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

US Congress Wrestling Copyright Law

Postby SlyckChuck » Mon Jul 12, 2004 2:41 pm

The need for evolution in copyright law, triggered by the digital era, has caused a tug-of-war between intellectual property based industries and consumers. Pulling for the copyright team are the entertainment industries, in particular the RIAA and the MPAA. On the competing team are the consumers, being lead by the EFF and P2P United.

On initial inspection, it appears the industry has taken the advantage. The Induce Act, sponsored by the notorious Hatch, will cripple American P2P applications as we know them. The industry also won the hearts and minds of Senate leaders, who have passed the Pirate Act. Consumer groups and legal analysts alike have spoken against the Act, which will stifle innovation and waste precious government resources on capturing music lovers sharing mp3 files. More information and a chance to protest can be found at “Sink the Pirate Act.”

But the Senate is not completely anti-consumer. The opposing team is receiving backing from Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.), who have introduced legislation they believe would ensure the American public's access to the nation's intellectual and artistic heritage.

The Public Domain Enhancement Act would repeal recent legislation which extended the lifetime of copyrights from 75 to 95 years after the author of a work dies. Instead, owners of copyrighted works -- such as songs, books and software – would have to pay a $1 fee to maintain their copyrights once 50 years have transpired from the work's original publication. If owners failed to pay the fee, the work would enter the public domain, and the public would be free to reproduce, republish or alter it.

It is still a far cry from the original 14 year lifetime of copyrights, but it helps bring a better balance between profiting from creativity and access to creative works.

An interesting comparison can be made with the pharmaceutical companies, who invest a vast amount of money and energy in developing new products, yet can receive a maximum patent period of 20 years.

So why does the music industry get special treatment? After all, copyright is copyright.

Perhaps on closer inspection, the Public Domain Enhancement Act is too little and only half hearted in comparison with the sweeping statements made by legislators on the industry team.

Is the ongoing battle in Congress the evolution of consumer rights in the digital environment? In light of the PIRATE and INDUCE Acts, it seems clear that consumer rights are taking second place to those of the industry.

Amidst all the new legislation, consumers ponder what legitimate use of their own computer is. In an election year, these consumers need to remember what President Lincoln said -- “Of the people, by the people, and for the people, ..."
The 80's Still Rule
User avatar
SlyckChuck
 
Posts: 7025
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 12:57 pm
Location: On Earth

Re: US Congress Wrestling Copyright Law

Postby xonerate » Mon Jul 12, 2004 10:34 pm

ln_solitude wrote:Instead, owners of copyrighted works -- such as songs, books and software – would have to pay a $1 fee to maintain their copyrights once 50 years have transpired from the work's original publication. If owners failed to pay the fee, the work would enter the public domain

That's still blatantly against the public interest.

Having copyright protection on a work is equivalent to having a total monopoly over it. Would it not be reasonable to require a fee of, say, $30 per year for a person to be given a monopoly by the government?

I have a monopoly on the usage of several domain names. For each domain, I pay about $30 per year for the privilege of having that monopoly.

I think it would be a huge bargain for an author to pay $30 per year to obtain exclusive rights over an entire book, musical recording, or other work.
xonerate
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2002 10:38 am

US Congress Wrestling Copyright Law

Postby SlyckChuck » Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:41 pm

I agree with you, the words I used said it best:

Perhaps on closer inspection, the Public Domain Enhancement Act is too little and only half hearted in comparison with the sweeping statements made by legislators on the industry team.



Perhaps as more people read this and see the fact industry has more rights than the consumers, many will rise up in anger to oppose measures recently taken. :idea:
The 80's Still Rule
User avatar
SlyckChuck
 
Posts: 7025
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 12:57 pm
Location: On Earth

Postby in_hiding » Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:34 am

I'm still very wary of any copyright length that is not fixed, but instead linked to the creator's lifespan.

What difference does it make to the public need or a work's usefulness how long the creator lives after he made it?

I feel there should be a fixed period (of, say, 50 years) of copyright from the time of the work's publication. If the creator is still alive and broke when the period is over, then tough sh1t: he had his chance and he blew it.
User avatar
in_hiding
 
Posts: 909
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 10:51 pm

Postby chacho » Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:26 pm

nice article, it will be interesting to see how this plays out...
User avatar
chacho
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 6:27 pm
Location: virginia beach

Postby Beto » Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:09 am

Ok so lemme get this straight then if this law passes then what they will have the right to confiscate our computers without a warrent?
Beto
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 7:26 pm

Postby Beto » Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:16 pm

Wow yeah that really clears things up thx guys yay :?
Beto
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 7:26 pm


Return to Slyck News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

© 2001-2008 Slyck.com