Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

community_studios - [Community_studios] Re: [DMCA_Discuss] Copyright is essentially wrong (I'm surprised no one's mentioned this from today's)

community_studios AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of all things related to Public Domain

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: tom poe <tompoe AT renonevada.net>
  • To: <dmca_discuss AT lists.microshaft.org>
  • Cc: "CommStudios" <community_studios AT lists.ibiblio.org>, "Reno_Perl_Group" <renotahoe-pm AT pm.org>
  • Subject: [Community_studios] Re: [DMCA_Discuss] Copyright is essentially wrong (I'm surprised no one's mentioned this from today's)
  • Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:22:37 -0700

Hi: My understanding of this concept, is that if we create a transformative
work, it must be "approved" by the original copyright holder. Or, the work
has to wait until the copyright is ended. Since we all agree [I hope], that
all works are based on previous knowledge and experience, i.e., from ideas
and expressions that came before, it flies in the face of advancement to
think copyrights are deserving of "life unto perpetuity". Under our present
system, Shakespear can sit and wait for what, maybe another 150 years, and
then publish his "original" work?

Those who believe that copyright should indeed, be granted unto perpetuity,
get into trouble when confronted with this notion, so we now have something
that looks like, copyrights are "property", and, for the good of society, in
that it is much more efficient to have as few doors as possible to negotiate
the "market transactions", advancement in the arts and sciences will thrive
if we lose the traditional concept, and replace it with "intellectual
property" concept. For example, although Disney based his works on previous
"works", he now wants to change the rules, and keep his "rights" from now
until forever. Nice for him, but bad for those who follow.
Thanks,
tom
http://www.studioforrecording.org/
http://www.ibiblio.org/studioforrecording/
http://renotahoe.pm.org/



On Thursday 02 May 2002 08:52, James S. Huggins \(DMCA Discuss\) wrote:
> =============================
> The works of Shakespear for instance would not have been written under
> copyright law (many of his works are based on works of about 30 years
> before he wrote his).
> =============================
>
> Is this explored anywhere in more detail?
>
>
> James S. Huggins
>
>
>
>
> ....
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> ------------------------
> http://www.anti-dmca.org
> ------------------------
>
> DMCA_Discuss mailing list
> DMCA_Discuss AT lists.microshaft.org
> http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page