h a l f b a k e r y
Number one on the no-fly list
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
With copyrights getting longer and longer and copyright laws and licesnes getting worse and worse, we should start an organization that collects donations and uses those to purchase important works into the public domain.
Free (As In Beer) Open Source Patent Network
http://www.halfbake..._20Patent_20Network
Rods Tiger's idea that could be a sister organisation to this idea. [st3f, Oct 04 2004]
Lessig's fight against copyright extension
http://www.projo.co..._22ednet.623bf.html
The US Supreme Court is set to rule by June on the constitutionality of all this copyright extending that has gone on. [krelnik, Oct 04 2004]
Annotation:
|
| |
Good idea, but at least that second "c" should be a "q." |
|
| |
I believe such organizations exist. But I also think we need to curtail the endless extension of copyrights in the US, which do not benefit the creators so much as their heirs or corporate successors. |
|
| |
Kudos to ironfroggy for not suggesting that intellectual property rights are immoral and that those who hold and enforce them should all be disemboweled, but for instead suggesting a way to provide free access that honors the rights of the i.p. holders and challenges those who want free access for all to put their money where their mouth is. I hope DrCurry is right and that such organizations do exist. |
|
| |
And though I think the importance of i.p. rights is often underestimated, I also agree with ironfroggy and DrCurry that the recent U.S. copyright extensions (and promises of more!) are ludicrous. Sure, it's a good idea to give monopoly control to encourage creation of valuable properties, but someone seems to have forgotten that the other end of the bargain is that our (society's) motivation for offering that monopoly period is that we eventually get free access once the creators, etc. have been rewarded. |
|
| |
Wouldn't this just inflate the price for copyright? |
|
| |
I see many good comments and I must thank you all for them, and mention that I did, in fact, spell "acquisitioning" correctly, according to dictionary.com :-) |
|
| |
As for clearing up questions: |
|
| |
What would the organization acquire the rights to? |
|
| |
If I started such a group, there would be a few things I would have in mind to purchase the rights to. However, I believe that should be left up to those who donate the funds. A voting system would be established and donations could also be given toward specific copyrighted works. The group would be an organizing body at most. |
|
| |
Whould this inflate the price for copyright? |
|
| |
I don't believe so, although I'm not educated much in the matters so perhaps someone else could clear us up on the matter? |
|
| |
This would, if the experiences of the painting world are anything to go by, simply make the established producers of works wealthier and diminish the opportunity of lesser known copyright holders to make a living from their work, as the work of known authors becomes a de facto currency. |
|
| |
It would see a false market created, as poor works by known authors gained in value unreasonably, culminating in the auction for millions of dollars of a short essay about a dirty, unmade bed, sitting in a little room, festooned with condom wrappers and used syringes. |
|
| |
Why? Why can't ironfroggy's philanthtropic venture support little-known work in addition to well-known work? Am I missing something? |
|
| |
Yes, why can't we buy the little guys's work? Certainly this would be a very disperse organization with many independant cells carrying out specific tasks of copyright purchase. |
|
| |
I really believe in this idea and would like to see it come to fruitation. Chalk it up on my to-do list. |
|
| |
and if they want to spend that much on the little guys work, well... arent they then kind of NOT the little guy? This would then promote the underdog and create a cycling affect of the creative masses. |
|
| |
Good idea. For starters, we could allow copyrights to pass into the public domain when they are supposed to and not pass bills like the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act, which was basically a billion dollar giveaway to Disney. Ironically, right after this, Sonny Bono skiied into a tree. Rumor has it he was assassinated by a Toon working for Disney. |
|
| |
Also, this process is the opposite of privatizing so I think we should call it publicizing. |
|
| |