Alternative 2009 Copyright Expirations 427
jrincayc writes "It's nearly the end of 2009. If the 1790 copyright maximum term of 28 years was still in effect, everything that had been published by 1981 would be now be in the public domain — like the original Ultima and God Emperor of Dune — and would be available for remixing and mashing up. If the 1909 copyright maximum term of 56 years (if renewed) were still in force, everything published by 1953 would now be in the public domain, freeing The City and the Stars and Forbidden Planet. If the 1976 copyright act term of 75* years (* it's complicated) still applied, everything published by 1934 would now be in the public domain, including Murder on the Orient Express. But thanks to the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, nothing in the US will go free until 2018, when 1923 works expire." Assuming Congress doesn't step in with a Copyright Extension Act of 2017. What are the odds?
Re:What did you expect? (Score:5, Informative)
The case was ELDRED V. ASHCROFT. Lawrence Lessig (and others) pointed out that the constitution only allows copyrights to be granted "for a limited time". SCOTUS responded that they couldn't give a shit what the constitution says. The decision was 7-2 so it's highly unlikely that the court will change it's mind anytime soon.
Re:What did you expect? (Score:5, Informative)
Lawrence Lessig argued that before the SCOTUS [cnet.com], and they wouldn't buy even that basic point, IIRC.
Re:What did you expect? (Score:4, Informative)
SCOTUS responded "On paper, it is limited - we don't care if Congress keeps changing the limit."
While I disagree with the decision, it's not QUITE the same thing as "[we] couldn't give a shit what the constitution says."
Copyright extension act (Score:4, Informative)
Sonny Bono's main argument in favour of the Copyright Extension Act hinged on providing a retirement fund for composers. So, it's somewhat ironic that killed himself by wrapping himself around a tree whilst skiing only a few years later.
Cliff Richards acted as a figurehead for a campaign in the UK to lengthen the copyright term on sound recordings [1] using similar arguments. If only...
[1] Very unsuccessfully - not least because some of his recordings were about to go out of copyright and the perception that he already had quite enough money.
Re:Ridiculous (Score:4, Informative)
The problem actually appears to have started in 1831. Why was nothing done then, since the US Congress dosn't (in theory) have the power to create ipso post facto laws?
I believe the term you're looking for is "ex post facto" ("after the fact") laws, not "ipso facto" ("by the fact itself").
I believe the courts *have* limited Congress, in that they aren't allowed to pass a law that would put works that have fallen into the public domain back under copyright.
"...copyright protection to last forever..." (Score:4, Informative)
SONNY BONO COPYRIGHT TERM EXTENSION ACT (House of Representatives - October 07, 1998) [loc.gov]
(should this search expire go to SONNY BONO COPYRIGHT TERM EXTENSION ACT (House of Representatives - October 07, 1998) [loc.gov] and look for page 9951)
"...Actually, Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever. I am informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution. I invite all of you to work with me to strengthen our copyright laws in all of the ways available to us. As you know, there is also Jack Valenti's proposal for term to last forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may look at that next Congress..."
Forever minus one day. Look for it around 2022-2023...r
Re:Five parties? Not in our system, even if you tr (Score:1, Informative)
FYI we DO NOT have a proportional system.
Re:Not 2017, but by 2023... (Score:2, Informative)
Already applies to "Peter Pan" in the UK, which has perpetual copyright, assigned to Great Ormond Street childrens' hospital.
Not recognised by other countries though, especially by pirate companies like Disney.
It is not 28 years (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Sickening (Score:2, Informative)
"lining the pockets of the already very-rich" is the sole point of extending copyright. Only they could afford the politicians necessary to make this happen.
But then America exists for the Corporations and the rich, not the citizens.
Re:What did you expect? (Score:3, Informative)
"But when the law says that e.g. copyright infringement has statutory damages of $1 mln per count then the court has no choice but to lay down such fines. "
In the United States, laws, as well as the accused, are on trial in a courtroom. If the people find a law to be unjust, the jury can strike it down with nullification. If a judge deems a law contrary to higher law, such as state/federal constitutions, the judge is able to throw the law out. It's one of the ideas passed down from the common law that forms the basis of the legal system in the United States.
Re:What did you expect? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What did you expect? (Score:4, Informative)
Limit the maximum size of corporations.
Hear that, AIG? Too big to fail is too big to exist.
Re:What did you expect? (Score:4, Informative)
Can someone hand this person an insightful mod? It's precisely what's wrong with copyright today.
Copyright should give you an incentive to create. That's its sole purpose. It is supposed to make you want to create instead of sit and wait 'til someone else does. It's the art equivalent of what patents are supposed to be in science: A reason to produce instead of consume.
It's no incentive to create again if I can milk what I created once.
Re:What did you expect? (Score:3, Informative)
Wikipedia has a long article about it here [wikipedia.org].
In short: a jury can acquit a suspect even when the law says he is guilty of a crime, so going against the letter of the law. In case multiple juries in separate cases do this, precedent is created that in effect overturns the law in question.
Juries however can NOT by themselves overturn a law. There have to be multiple juries deciding against a law, and even then the law itself is still there, and will have to be removed by the government.