Photonic
Ad astra!
What. The. Flying. Fuck.
Supreme Court Says Congress May Re-Copyright Public Domain Works | Threat Level | Wired.com
Supreme Court Says Congress May Re-Copyright Public Domain Works | Threat Level | Wired.com
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
(a) The text of the Copyright Clause does not exclude applicationof copyright protection to works in the public domain. [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Eldred [/FONT][/FONT]is largely dispositive of petitioners’ claim that the Clause’s confinementof a copyright’s lifespan to a "limited Tim[e]" prevents the removal ofworks from the public domain. In [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Eldred, [/FONT][/FONT]the Court upheld the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA), which extended, by 20 years, the terms of existing copyrights. The text of the Copyright Clause, theCourt observed, contains no "command that a time prescription, onceset, becomes forever ‘fixed’ or ‘inalterable,’ "
It's complex, but I'd hope the original artist of a work would benefit from his or her work for a lifetime if his or her financial situation is marginal or the artist became disabled from producing more work and needed the income. In general, a person who has dedicated his or her life to an art is more likely to be obscure than one who is able to capitalize, profit, and move on due to a knack for management, or one who is able to capitalize on the poorer artists' work after the copyright expires 17 years later. Art requires a focus and a discipline, but that trait does not always leave the artist capable in financial management, so he dies with a brush or baton in his hand, too poor to afford a decent burial like Mozart or Van Gogh or Poe.It ought to, though and here's why...(a) The text of the Copyright Clause does not exclude applicationof copyright protection to works in the public domain. [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Eldred [/FONT][/FONT]is largely dispositive of petitioners claim that the Clauses confinementof a copyrights lifespan to a "limited Tim[e]" prevents the removal ofworks from the public domain. In [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Eldred, [/FONT][/FONT]the Court upheld the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA), which extended, by 20 years, the terms of existing copyrights. The text of the Copyright Clause, theCourt observed, contains no "command that a time prescription, onceset, becomes forever fixed or inalterable, "
Because if it doesn't, then people can find themselves in violation of copyright laws EX POST FACTO.
And that does violate a principle of FAIRNESS that we ought to be able to expect in our laws.
It's complex, but I'd hope the original artist of a work would benefit from his or her work for a lifetime if his or her financial situation is marginal or the artist became disabled from producing more work and needed the income. In general, a person who has dedicated his or her life to an art is more likely to be obscure than one who is able to capitalize, profit, and move on due to a knack for management, or one who is able to capitalize on the poorer artists' work after the copyright expires 17 years later. Art requires a focus and a discipline, but that trait does not always leave the artist capable in financial management, so he dies with a brush or baton in his hand, too poor to afford a decent burial like Mozart or Van Gogh or Poe.It ought to, though and here's why...(a) The text of the Copyright Clause does not exclude applicationof copyright protection to works in the public domain. [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Eldred [/FONT][/FONT]is largely dispositive of petitioners claim that the Clauses confinementof a copyrights lifespan to a "limited Tim[e]" prevents the removal ofworks from the public domain. In [FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook][FONT=Century Schoolbook,Century Schoolbook]Eldred, [/FONT][/FONT]the Court upheld the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA), which extended, by 20 years, the terms of existing copyrights. The text of the Copyright Clause, theCourt observed, contains no "command that a time prescription, onceset, becomes forever fixed or inalterable, "
Because if it doesn't, then people can find themselves in violation of copyright laws EX POST FACTO.
And that does violate a principle of FAIRNESS that we ought to be able to expect in our laws.