[Baron Munchausen]

Originally posted by Jmenschenfresser:
IIRC, wasn't Napster sold for something like 50 million. I know it was quite a bit, but I don't know who the money went to.

$50 million is chicken feed. A single 'blockbuster' album can make more than this. So really, Napster was sold for a song.

Originally posted by Jmenschenfresser:

There is an ultimate limit on printed copyright, even though there exist extensions beyond the 70 years after the author's death. I think beyond that you can extend it another 30 or 40...not sure. Read it once when trying to figure out if a GK Chesterton book was still copyrighted.

I am completely on Baron's side in this, and I think the fundamental philosophy of this issue can be found in many a college lit class--when they discuss interpretations of works. Does it matter what the author thought when he wrote work X, or is the only real interpretation the one we create, not knowing what he was thinking. The fundamental question, beyond that, consists of ownership of ideas and how they are presented. Some authors get profoundly offended when critics or professors interpret a book to mean something he/she never meant it to mean.

I think it is glaringly obvious that the readers, hearers, viewers, etc own the content. Not the artists. Society owns the content. Because such things define us...we use them to communicate and relate. The only wrench is the money, and god, if that isn't a massive wrench.

I say the copyright laws should resemble a car warenty. 10 years or 1 million copies. I mean come on, after 1 million copies, you don't need the money any more, and after 10 years, for music at least, tastes change...you are part of history, not business.

In this case, though, the current 'interpretation' has been dictated by the corporations who want to setup a free ride for themselves. The 'rebels' trying to over-thrown absolute copyright are the ones who are interpreting it as originally written! The constitution clearly states that copyrights and patents are there to provide an incentive for people to contribute to the public domain, NOT to guard 'intellectual property'!

In Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, Congress is granted the power:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

How that relates to copyright in other countries, I don't know. I suppose if this challenge succeeds they will try to lock us into a treaty that forces their interpretation since that method has been so successful in other areas. Since there is a clause allowing for provisions in the Constitution to be over-ridden by international treaties this is going to be the route that everyone goes to get their way now.

[ June 27, 2002, 19:39: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]