I
strongly recommend that interested parties read this full article on Wikipedia
covering copyright law and its evolution: History of copyright law
The good
old House of Lords in England made the call in the mid 1700's that both Public
Domain and statue-defined Copyright existed. France and the US were also
grappling with how to promote, protect and ultimately share with the public any
works. Remember, before this only a specific publisher in London would forever
be the one with the right to print Shakespeare; a right under attack by
devilish Scottish printers (how dare they!)
Now that
the terms were subject to legislation, a moderate term of 14 years (with an
extension of 14 more possible if the author was still alive) secured a limited
monopoly that was intended to hold the author through to the end of his days
and secure a reasonable inheritance for one's children. Not at all unexpected
in societies that had Land Owners who derived profit by renting their land to
use by farmers, workers or industry. (Read some Adam Smith if you want to hear
more about how Rent is a fundamental element in economic understanding at the
time.)
A hundred
years later and we have internationalization of the scheme being defined in
treaty. In the Berne Convention, signatories were all agreeing to
Lifetime-plus-fifty-years as the new minimum term.
How did
we get that jump? Again, the publishers constantly push things back toward
their original conception of perpetual copyright. These expansions always cite
the author's need, but benefit the business to an equal or greater amount. And
terms have been pushed farther and farther out over the decades. Partially
because it turns out there is big business in making sequels and derivative
works.
Literature
has turned from being primarily a means of disseminating information and turned
into an entertainment venue where the public is voracious for new-but-familiar
content. (Amusingly, this does not hold true for music, which falls completely
out of public favor in about 40-50 years. Yet the RIAA is one of the fiercest
fighters of copyright protections.)
Content
publishers now fear that someone will make a better version of James Bond's
Casino Royale if they are given the chance to make their own derivatives. And
they are probably right. But that's not the best justification for
110-year-long copyright terms just so we can protect Mickey Mouse's first
movie.
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét