On 07/12/09 11:13, Darren New wrote:
> professional artists out of work. You'd also have artists unable to
> leave an inheritance of art to their children.

	Not quite the topic at hand, but if the artists make money on their 
work, the children will get that inheritance.

	The more I think about it, the more I feel that excessive copyright is 
worse for society. What's excessive? Say over 20 years. I don't think 
the government should protect an entity that allows someone to produce a 
major piece of work once and live his whole life off of it because the 
copyright extends beyond his life. I think it invalidates the whole 
benefit to society that copyright is supposed to bring. 20 years should 
be sufficient, really.+++

	Having the children continue to profit off of it for a long time sounds 
even worse.


+++ Of course, you do have borderline cases where some piece of work may 
only begin to show a profit around the time the copyright expires. Small 
changes to my scheme will fix that...

-- 
This shepherd asks his dog to please go and round up the sheep and see 
how many there are...
The dog obediently rounds up the sheep and tells the boss, "there are 40 
sheep out there."
The shepherd says, "Are you sure?  I thought there were only 37"
The dog sheepishly says, "But I rounded them up."

Post a reply to this message