I understand the argument about reforming patents in an accelerated age, but how exactly do copyrights stifle creativity?
How would the public benefit if all of a sudden Mickey Mouse was in the public domain? I can see a bunch of toy companies salivating, but how will it improve the public good?
How has Mark Twain's work been remixed or creatively remained since it entered the public domain?
Would publishers not have released "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" if "The Scarlett Letter" was still protected?
Again, patent reform makes some sense since increased access to core tech has proven to spark innovation in unforseen places, but I can't think of many examples where copyrighted material entered the public domain to the benefit of us all.
Also, copyright law seems to be pretty flexible with fair use provisions, limitations on what can be copyrighted (e.g. no recipes), etc.
As a case in point consider Avatar. It was widely mocked as being "Dances with Wolves with Aliens" and it is the highest grossing movie ever. How is that possible when the IP world is as muddled as the author suggests?
I can see a bunch of toy companies salivating, but how will it improve the public good?
Unfortunately, IP companies are devising ever draconian laws that impact liberties, legal due process and privacy. IP companies have made themselves into one of the great enemy of civil liberties; if that is the logical consequence of having to enforce IP, perhaps the whole system has to be scrapped.
Still, framing everything in the context of 'public good' is a slippery slope. Some things are right or wrong without utilitarian calculus.
P.S. Mickey Mouse is a Disney trademark, which makes it theirs in perpetuity. Arguably, trademarks are the weakest and least intrusive category of IP.
> Arguably, trademarks are the weakest and least intrusive category of IP.
They aren't really IP; they're consumer protection. Trademarks are meant to allow people to know who makes what they're buying by giving companies a way to definitively mark their wares without having to worry that someone else is going to rip off that mark in a confusing fashion. 'Confusing' works out to meaning a given trademark only applies to a specific field of endeavor; look at United Airlines vs United Van Lines, the moving company, or Cisco the networking hardware maker vs Sysco the restaurant supply company.
I think it's fairly clear that whatever 'property' interpretation you can put on those laws, it's subservient to the consumer protection aspects.
Mickey Mouse is a red herring. There are tens of thousands of works that could be preserved and redistributed on the Internet right now, if only they were in the public domain. Characters that could be household names like Sherlock Holmes or Frankenstein are languishing in obscurity, because even finding who owns the copyright isn't feasible.
Copyright laws should definitely be reformed. Does Disney want to keep Mickey forever? Fine, just make them renew the copyright every ten years or so. Wouldn't this be a better solution for everybody?
I don't think Sherlock Holmes is languishing in obscurity - in the last couple of years there's been a new movie adaptation and a (far superior) TV series. The original books are old enough now that they would be public domain, even in the US?
Sorry for not being clear. I was citing Sherlock Holmes and Frankenstein as examples of famous characters that are in the public domain. (Holmes's situation is in fact a bit murky in the US)
Here's an example of how lack of copyright can foster innovation and it's for the greater good of the society to not restrict access to "designs", or charge a lot of money to license them.
Yes, it has. Notably Big River, which won quite a few Tonys (think Oscars for musical theatre), a huge number of movies (including at least one by Disney), a Japanese anime, and probably a few Family Guy shout-outs.
How would the public benefit if all of a sudden Mickey Mouse was in the public domain? I can see a bunch of toy companies salivating, but how will it improve the public good?
How has Mark Twain's work been remixed or creatively remained since it entered the public domain?
Would publishers not have released "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" if "The Scarlett Letter" was still protected?
Again, patent reform makes some sense since increased access to core tech has proven to spark innovation in unforseen places, but I can't think of many examples where copyrighted material entered the public domain to the benefit of us all.
Also, copyright law seems to be pretty flexible with fair use provisions, limitations on what can be copyrighted (e.g. no recipes), etc.
As a case in point consider Avatar. It was widely mocked as being "Dances with Wolves with Aliens" and it is the highest grossing movie ever. How is that possible when the IP world is as muddled as the author suggests?